Allahabad High Court

VIKAS KHARWARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 11 May 2026
Bench: YOGESH DUBEY JOINT REGISTRAR JUDICIAL

Holding

The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Vikas Kharwar, who had been in custody for eight years pending trial in a case registered under IPC Sections 302 and 120‑B. The applicant argued that the FIR was lodged against an unknown person, his name emerged only from a confidential informer, and only two witnesses had been examined, while co‑accused Raja Ram and Dharmendra Singh Yadav had already been granted bail. The State opposed bail, contending the seriousness of the murder charge. After reviewing the record and noting the prolonged pre‑trial detention and lack of direct evidence against the applicant, the court found the case suitable for bail. It ordered the release of the applicant on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions to prevent witness tampering and ensure his presence at trial stages.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to an accused under Section 483 B.N.S.S. 2023 for IPC 302/120‑B charges given long pre‑trial detention and pendency of trial.
Whether the nature of the evidence, including confidential informer information and witness statements, warrants denial of bail.
Whether the grant of bail to co‑accused influences the applicant's entitlement to bail.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 351, 483
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 161
Indian Penal Code — s. 120-B, 302

Subjects

bail
pre‑trial detention
IPC 302
IPC 120‑B
B.N.S.S 2023
criminal procedure
witness intimidation
Uttar Pradesh

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49242 of 2023

Vikas Kharwar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gyanendra Prasad Mahant, Purnendu Pratap
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

1. Heard Sri Gyanendra Prasad Mahant, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri B.P.
Maurya, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on
bail in Case Crime No. 660 of 2017 under Sections 302, 120-B IPC registered at
Police Station Mohammadabad, District Ghazipur during pendency of the trial.

3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
languishing in jail for the last eight years and the trial is not likely to conclude in near
future as only two witnesses have been examined so far. It is further submitted that
FIR has been lodged against unknown and name of the applicant has surfaced during
investigation after about five months in some confidential information given by an
informer to the police. Two witnesses Narendra Singh Yadav and Bhaskar have stated
in their statements recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. that they saw co-accused Raja
Ram and Dharmendra Singh Yadav fleeing from the place of occurrence holding
country-made pistols in their hands. It is further submitted that co-accused Raja Ram
and Dharmendra Singh Yadav have already been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench
of this Court. It is further submitted that applicant has been languishing in jail since
08.3.2018 and he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also
been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no
likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
applicant.

5. FIR has been lodged against unknown as per which, some unknown persons are
said to have murdered brother of the first informant Siddharthnath Singh Yadav and
name of the applicant has surfaced on some confidential information given by an
informer to the police. Two witnesses Narendra Singh Yadav and Bhaskar have stated
BAIL No. 49242 of 2023
2

in their statements recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. that they saw co-accused Raja
Ram and Dharmendra Singh Yadav fleeing from the place of occurrence holding
country-made pistols in their hands. Co-accused Raja Ram and Dharmendra Singh
Yadav have already been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and the
applicant is languishing in jail since 08.3.2018 i.e. for the last eight years and the trial
is not likely to conclude in near future.

6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record
and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for
bail. Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED.

7. Let the applicant Vikas Kharwar involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on
bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-

(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or
promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from
disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates
fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement
under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any
adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial
court.

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either
personally or through his counsel.

8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.

9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of
determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression
on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its
independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in
this order.

May 12, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…