Allahabad High Court

UTKARSH JAISWALversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 11 May 2026
Bench: KRISHAN PAHAL

Holding

The court held that prima facie the applicant made out a case for bail and therefore granted bail.

Summary

The High Court considered a second bail application filed by Utkarsh Jaiswal, who is charged under IPC sections 105, 336(2), 336(3), 340(2), 87 and 61(2) BNS for an alleged offence at a victim's residence. The applicant argued that the mere presence in the room does not prove guilt, highlighted that the victim's mobile remained active after he left, and pointed to a viscera report showing alcohol and tranquilizer but no evidence that he administered them. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges. The court noted that the trial had not even framed charges and was proceeding slowly, and that the post‑departure mobile activity and lack of direct evidence created a prima facie case for bail. Consequently, the court granted bail subject to a personal bond and sureties with standard conditions.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the charges under IPC sections 105, 336, 340, 87 and 61(2) BNS.
Whether the evidence of the victim's mobile phone activity after the applicant left the room weakens the prosecution's case.
Whether the presence of alcohol and tranquilizer in the victim's viscera, without proof of administration by the applicant, affects bail considerations.
Whether the delay in trial proceedings and the fact that charges have not yet been framed justify granting bail.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 105, 336(2), 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) BNS, 87

Subjects

bail
IPC sections
criminal procedure
trial delay
mobile call records
viscera report
alcohol
tranquilizer
presumption of innocence

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4714 of 2026

Utkarsh Jaiswal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mayank Chandra, Mohd. Akif, Surya
Pratap Singh, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.68 out of 243)

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit and counter affidavit filed
today are taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Manish Tiwari, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri
Mayank Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.P. Patel, learned
State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.48 of 2025, under Sections 105,
336(2), 336(3), 340(2), 87, 61(2) BNS, Police Station Fazalganj, District
Kanpur Nagar, during the pendency of trial.

4. This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first one
was rejected by this Court vide order dated 27.8.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No.23535 of 2025.

5. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has argued that the case of the
applicant was not properly argued earlier. It has been submitted that the
allegation that the applicant was seen entering the room of the deceased at
1:40 a.m. and coming out at 2:36 a.m. by itself does not establish his
involvement in the alleged offence.

6. As a fresh ground, learned Senior Counsel has contended that the mobile
phone of the victim remained active even after the applicant had allegedly
left the room at 2:36 a.m. In this regard, reliance has been placed upon the
BAIL No. 4714 of 2026
2

CDR filed as Annexure-12 to the affidavit accompanying the bail
application. The said CDR reflects that from the victim’s mobile number
8299322989, an outgoing call of four seconds was made at 02:38:01 hours
and another outgoing call of sixteen seconds was made at 03:33:33 hours,
i.e., much after the applicant had left the room. It has further been argued
that the second call was made after about an hour of the applicant leaving the
room.

7. Learned Senior Counsel has further submitted that the viscera report has
been received, which categorically indicates the presence of ethyl alcohol
and tranquilizer. The presence of ethyl alcohol suggests consumption of
liquor, while tranquilizer may be treated as sleeping pills. It has been argued
that there is no material on record to suggest that the applicant had
administered either the liquor or the tranquilizer to the victim.

8. It has been further argued by learned Senior Counsel for the applicant that
there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in
jail since 21.5.2025, as such, the period of incarceration comes out to be
more than eleven months. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not
misuse the liberty of bail.

9. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application.

10. This Court had called for the status of trial from the concerned trial
court. As per the said status report dated 9.3.2026, even the charge has not
been framed and the case was committed before the sessions court on
19.1.2026 only. Thus, the trial appears to be proceeding at a snail’s pace.

11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made
by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the fact that the victim’s mobile phone remained active for
about one hour after the applicant had left her room at 2:36 a.m., and further
taking into account the viscera report, which indicates the presence of ethyl
alcohol and tranquilizer in it, and without expressing any opinion on the
merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that the applicant has
made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

12. Let the applicant- Utkarsh Jaiswal, be released on bail on furnishing a
BAIL No. 4714 of 2026
3

personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned,
subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that he shall not
tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the
trial court as required.

13. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The
observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits.

(Krishan Pahal,J.)
May 12, 2026
Vikas Verma

Digitally signed by :-
VIKAS VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…