Created by Fuzzy Cloud

ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL

256 judgments · newest first · showing 1–200

ANKUSH DHOBIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Ankush Dhobi was arrested in connection with an alleged offence under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 of the B.N.S. and Sections 3/4 of the POCSO Act, accused of enticing the daughter of the first informant. The victim’s statement under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S. indicated that she left the house of …

TABIS-UR-REHMANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Tabis‑Ur‑Rehman, who was implicated in a cyber‑fraud case involving alleged transfer of Rs 49 lakh through a Binance crypto payment link. The prosecution relied on WhatsApp chats linking the applicant with co‑accused Gaurav and Asad …

FATEH MOHAMMADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Fateh Mohammad, who was implicated in a case involving kidnapping, dacoity and alleged rape under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR, that the victim’s …

ASHWANI KHARWARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Ashwani Kharwar, sought bail in a dowry‑death case (Crime No. 552 of 2024) filed under Sections 85 and 80 of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He claimed he was falsely implicated, asserting that his wife died by suicide and that no specific dowry demand …

RAM DULAR YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ram Dular Yadav was charged under Sections 304 and 323 of the IPC for assaulting a deceased person. The first bail application was rejected, but the applicant argued that no specific role was assigned to him, the co‑accused had already been released on bail, all witnesses had been examined, and he …

SANDEEP KUSHWAHAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Sandeep Kushwaha, who is charged under Sections 65(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 5(m) and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 for allegedly sexually assaulting a child aged …

ADITYA BHARTIYAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Aditya Bhartiya, sought bail in a murder case (Section‑103(1) of the B.N.S., 2023, equivalent to IPC s.302) after the charge was framed on 27‑01‑2026. This was his second bail application; the first was rejected because CCTV footage placed him with the deceased and a scarf used in the …

SUMANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant Suman, the sister‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under sections 85, 80(2), 352, 351(3) of the B.N.S. and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in Crime No. 127 of 2026. She contended that she was falsely implicated, that there was no material showing she …

KESHAVRAM @ KRIPARAM PRAJAPATIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Keshavram @ Kriparam Prajapati in a POCSO case where the FIR alleged he enticed a girl, purportedly over 17 years old, away from her family. The applicant argued that the victim’s statement indicated a consensual relationship, no …

AKASH SINGH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Akash Singh and Surajpal Singh, who are the brother‑in‑law and father‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide following a domestic dispute. They were charged under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the BNS Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition …

AJAY YADAV @ AJAY KUMAR YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Ajay Yadav, who was not named in the FIR but was mentioned in a co‑accused’s statement as having deposited money into the account of Sunrise Traders, a firm alleged to have trafficked a codeine‑based cough syrup. The applicant faced …

SANJAY YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sanjay Yadav, who was alleged to be involved in the illegal transport of codeine‑based cough syrup concealed in a DCM vehicle. The FIR named the DCM owner and driver, but not Yadav, who merely provided a transport service. The applicant argued …

MOHAMMAD KAIFversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Mohammad Kaif, who was arrested under Sections 8 and 21 of the NDPS Act for allegedly possessing 500 bottles of codeine‑based cough syrup. The applicant argued that the quantity per bottle was not specified, making the total amount fall …

AJAY YADAV @ AJAY KUMAR YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ajay Yadav was arrested in connection with a case involving the illegal sale and transportation of codeine‑based cough syrup and was charged under several IPC sections and the NDPS Act. The FIR did not name him, but co‑accused statements and CCTV footage showing a Rs 20 lakh deposit to a trader were …

AJAY YADAV @ AJAY KUMAR YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Ajay Yadav, who was implicated in a case (Crime No. 378 of 2025) involving alleged illegal sale and transportation of codeine‑based cough syrup under several IPC and NDPS provisions. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR …

SURAJversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Suraj, who was arrested in connection with Crime No. 85 of 2026 under IPC sections 137(2), 87, 64(1) and POCSO Act sections 3 and 4. The FIR alleged that Suraj had enticed the daughter of the first informant, but the victim’s statements under …

DURGESH PASWANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Durgesh Paswan was arrested in connection with a case under the BNSS Act, 2023 (sections 87, 64(2)(m), 137(2)) and the POCSO Act (sections 5L/6) alleging that he enticed the daughter of the first informant. The victim, however, gave statements under sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS Act stating that …

AARIFversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Aarif, who was arrested in Crime No. 282 of 2026 under Sections 64(1), 74, 77 and 351(3) of the B.N.S. The prosecution alleged that Aarif had a consensual relationship with a major‑age girl, recorded an obscene video, and used it to …

GAUTAM KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Gautam Kumar, who was arrested in Crime No. 336 of 2026 under Sections 65(1), 137(2) of the BNS Act and Section 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act. The FIR alleged that the sister of the first informant disappeared, but the victim’s statements under …

ISRARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The Allahabad High Court considered bail application No. 35200 of 2026 filed by Israr, accused under Sections 70(2) and 137(2) of the B.N.S. Act and Sections 5G/6 of the POCSO Act for alleged kidnapping, attempted forced marriage and rape of a minor. The prosecution’s case relied on the victim’s …

ASHISH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ashish Yadav, who is charged under Section 80(2) of the CrPC, Section 85 of the B.N.S. Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in Crime No. 160 of 2025. The applicant argued that the prosecution’s key witnesses – the deceased’s …

RAHULversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Rahul in a criminal case (Crime No. 83 of 2026) involving alleged inducement of a minor under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m) of the CrPC and Sections 51/6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant argued that the victim’s statements indicated a …

RAM PRASADversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ram Prasad, the father‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under sections 80(2), 85, 91 of the B.N.S. and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He contended that the allegations were vague, there was no material showing dowry harassment, and that a co‑accused had already been …

PANKAJ @ PRASHANTversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Pankaj @ Prashant in a criminal case (Crime No. 135 of 2026) under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The FIR alleged that the applicant had enticed the daughter of the …

RINKU PALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Rinku Pal, who was charged under Sections 137(1), 64(2)(M) of the B.N.S. and Sections 5L/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act for alleged rape of a minor. The prosecution alleged that the accused lured the …

KAPIL KUMAR PRAJAPATIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Kapil Kumar Prajapati applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 134 of 2026) under Sections 137(2) and 64(1) of the BNSS, 2023 and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act. The FIR alleged that he had enticed the daughter of the first informant, but the victim’s statement under Sections 180 and 183 of …

KARAN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Karan Kumar in a criminal case (Crime No. 405 of 2026) involving alleged offences under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(1) of the CrPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012. The FIR alleged that the applicant had enticed the daughter of the first …

CHAMELI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Chameli Devi, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by self‑immolation, was charged under Sections 85, 80(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3) of the B.N.S Act and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act. The applicant contended that she was falsely implicated, that there was no material showing cruelty or dowry demand …

MUKULversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, husband of a woman who died under unnatural circumstances, sought bail in a dowry‑related case (Crime No.286 of 2025) invoking Sections 85, 80(2) of the CrPC, Sections 238, 352 of the IPC, Section 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He claimed false …

MEENA NISHADversusSTATE OF U.P.

Meena Nishad, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the B.N.S. Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that she was falsely implicated, lacking any material showing she harassed the deceased for dowry, and …

RANVEERversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ranveer, the father‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Sections 80(2), 85 of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He contended that he was falsely implicated, that there was no material to establish the statutory presumption of dowry death, and that the …

JUGUNU CHAUHANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, husband of a woman who died by suicide within seven years of marriage, sought bail in a criminal case alleging dowry harassment and related offences. He argued that he was falsely implicated, had no prior criminal record, and that the charge sheet negated the need for custodial …

BABLU KHANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Bablu Khan, the father‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide after a domestic dispute. He was charged under Sections 85, 80(2), 123, 115(2) of the Indian Penal Code, and sections 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act in connection with a alleged dowry‑related …

SHAHINversusSTATE OF U.P.

Shahin, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that she was falsely implicated, that there was no material showing cruelty or dowry demand before the death, and that a …

PRABHAT KHAREversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Prabhat Khare in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 33704 of 2026, relating to charges under several sections of the B.N.S. and the NDPS Act for alleged receipt and sale of codeine‑based cough syrup. The applicant argued that he was not a …

AMANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Aman, who was accused under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in connection with the suicide of his sister-in-law. Aman argued that he was falsely implicated, that …

SMT VIDHYARANIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Smt Vidhyarani, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Sections 80(2), 85 of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that she was falsely implicated, that there was no material showing dowry harassment, and that bail should be granted …

MUTTUR PRAJAPATI @ MUTUR PRAJAPATIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Muttur Prajapati, the father‑in‑law of a woman who died under unnatural circumstances, applied for bail in a murder‑related case (Crime No. 187 of 2026) invoking Sections 85, 80(2), 238, 3(5) of the CrPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The prosecution alleged that the deceased's husband …

AMANAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Amana, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that she was falsely implicated, that there was no material showing cruelty or dowry demand prior to the death, and that the …

RAJESH ANURAGIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Rajesh Anuragi, accused under Sections 80(2) & 85 of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in connection with the suicide of his wife. The applicant argued that no call‑detail records (CDR) linked him or his family to the …

MOHAMMAD USMANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a second bail application filed by Mohammad Usman, who had been in custody since 2 October 2025 for offences under sections 109(1), 115(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The applicant argued that the key witness, the alleged victim Rehan, turned hostile during …

DEVESH ALIAS ARVESHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Devesh (alias Arvesh), who is charged under IPC sections 498‑A, 302, 201 and 34 for the murder of his wife. The body was discovered in his house after being allegedly moved there by a person named Dahla, who could not be traced during …

RINKU GOLAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Rinku Gola, who was charged in Crime No. 554 of 2025 under sections of the CrPC, the B.N.S., the POCSO Act and the S.C/S.T. Act for allegedly enticing a minor and creating obscene material. The applicant argued that an earlier FIR and a prior …

PRADEEP KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Pradeep Kumar, who was charged under CrPC Section 65(1), IPC Sections 351(3) and 352, and POCSO Sections 3 and 4(2) for allegedly attempting indecent assault on a minor. The applicant argued that the victim’s statements recorded under Sections …

ARJUN SINGH ALIAS DHEERAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Arjun Singh, filed a bail application after the trial had concluded and he had been acquitted. The applicant's counsel argued that the bail petition was now moot. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, raised no objection. The Court examined whether a bail …

BIJJI ALIAS VIJAY ALIAS BRIJESHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant Bijji alias Vijay alias Brijesh was arrested in connection with a murder case (Criminal No. 165 of 2023) and alleged violations of the Arms Act. He was not named in the FIR; his alleged involvement stems solely from the confessional statement of co‑accused Shahbaz. The sole eyewitness, …

SAURABH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Saurabh Yadav, accused of rape, blackmail, and recording an obscene video of the victim. The prosecution alleged that the accused forced the victim into sexual intercourse after blackmail, while the defense highlighted a delayed FIR, lack of …

MANJEET PRATAP SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, husband of a woman who died by suicide within seven years of marriage, sought bail in a criminal case filed under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act, 1961. He claimed false implication, lack of prior criminal record, and that the charge sheet …

VIRENDRAPALversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Virandrapal, accused in a dowry‑related death case (Crime No. 272/2025) under Sections 115(2), 85 and 80(2) of the B.N.S and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant, husband of the deceased who allegedly committed suicide, argued …

JWALA PRASADversusSTATE OF U.P.

Jwala Prasad was charged under Section 105 of the Indian Penal Code for the death of his brother Chhabiram during a violent altercation at Lahta, Varanasi. The prosecution alleged that the applicant attacked his brother, who died two days later, while the defence argued that both parties were …

CHHAVIKANT SON OF GAUTAM ALIAS CHHAVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Chhavikant Gautam (alias Chhavi) in a criminal case (Crime No. 07 of 2025) involving alleged offences under IPC sections 137(2), 351(2), 64 and sections 3/4 of the POCSO Act. The victim, a minor aged 17 years 11 months, had left her …

HARVINDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Harvindra Singh filed a second bail application in a case involving forgery and cheating under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNSS). The applicant relied on Section 480(6) of the BNSS, arguing that because the trial had not concluded within 60 days of the first date fixed for …

UMA RAM AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

Uma Ram and Lal Devi, the father‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, were charged under Sections 80(2), 85 of the B.N.S. 2023 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. They contended that there was no material linking them to any dowry harassment and that the …

SONI @ SONIYA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Soni @ Soniya Devi, mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the B.N.S. and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act in a dowry‑death case. She argued that there was no material linking her to any cruelty or harassment and that the presumption of …

CHANDRABHANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Chandrabhan, the father‑in‑law of a woman who had died by suicide, who was charged under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, …

TIJIYA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Tijiya Devi, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that she was falsely implicated, lacking any material showing she harassed the deceased for dowry, and that the …

VIJAY KESHSHARWANIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Vijay Keshsharwani, a father‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide after a domestic dispute, was charged under Sections 85 and 80 of the B.N.S. Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He contended that the allegations of dowry harassment were unfounded, that there was …

PIYUSH GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Piyush Gupta, filed a criminal miscellaneous bail application after the trial concluded and he was acquitted on 31 October 2025. Counsel argued that since the applicant had been acquitted, the bail application was no longer necessary and should be dismissed as infructuous. The State, …

MUNNARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Munnar, the father‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, that there was no material …

RAEES ALIAS RAHEES AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicants, Raees (alias Rahees) and Kallu, sought bail in a murder case (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15439 of 2025) where they were not named in the FIR but were implicated through a witness statement. The prosecution had filed a charge sheet under IPC sections 333, 310(3) and 317(3) …

HIMANSHU KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Himanshu Kumar, who was arrested under several sections of the B.N.S. and the POCSO Act for alleged inappropriate touching of a minor. The victim’s statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S. were contradictory, and the medical …

SUNIL YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The applicant Sunil Yadav was arrested in connection with a case registered under several sections of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act, alleging rape and trafficking. The FIR was lodged by the victim's father, and the victim initially corroborated the allegations, but later, during …

DILSHAD HASHMI @ RAHULversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Dilshad Hashmi (alias Rahul) in a criminal case (Crime No. 182 of 2026) involving alleged enticement of a minor under sections of the BNS Act, the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act. The applicant argued that the victim’s statement under …

SHANIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Shani, who is charged under Sections 64, 74, 352, 351(3) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act for allegedly outraging the modesty of a minor. The victim’s statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S. indicated a …

ASHISHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ashish under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(1) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3/4 of the POCSO Act in a case where the FIR alleged he had enticed the daughter of the first informant. The victim’s statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS …

SHUAIBversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Shuaib applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 310 of 2026) involving sections of the B.N.S. and the POCSO Act. The FIR, lodged by the victim’s father, alleged disappearance, but the victim’s statements under sections 180 and 183 BNSS were contradictory and the medical report showed no …

SMT BABITAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Smt Babita, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under IPC Sections 80(2), 85, 123(2) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that she was falsely implicated, that there was no material to establish a dowry‑death presumption, and that she had no …

HARIOM RAJBHARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Hariom Rajbhar, husband of a woman who died under unnatural circumstances within seven years of marriage, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 291 of 2025) alleging dowry harassment. He argued that he was falsely implicated, had no prior criminal record, and that the charge sheet …

SURESHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Suresh, the father‑in‑law of a woman who allegedly committed suicide, in a case registered under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant contended that he was falsely …

CHHAVI NATHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Chhavi Nath, who is accused in Crime No. 228 of 2022 for offences under IPC sections 147, 148, 149, 325, 323, 504, 506 and 304, including murder. The prosecution alleges that the accused and co‑accused attacked the deceased and other persons, …

RAMSAKHIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ramsakhi, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Sections 85, 80(2) of the BNS Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She sought bail, arguing that there was no material linking her to any dowry harassment and that she was falsely implicated; she also …

HASEENversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a second bail application filed by Haseen, who was implicated in Crime No. 152 of 2025 based on a co-accused's confessional statement, though his name was absent from the FIR and no weapon was recovered from him. The applicant argued that no prosecution witness …

ROBINversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Robin, accused in Crime No. 142 of 2026 under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (sections 64(1) and 115(2)) and the POCSO Act (sections 3 and 4) for alleged rape of the informant's daughter. The applicant argued that the victim’s statement …

DALVEER SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Dalveer Singh was charged under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for alleged abduction and assault. His first bail application was rejected, but three co‑accused were later released on bail by the same bench. The applicant argued that, given the parity with co‑accused and the …

AKHILESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Akhilesh Kumar, accused under sections 64(2)(m), 115(2) and 351(3) of the Indian Penal Code for alleged obscene video and related offences. The investigating officer admitted that no obscene video was found on the accused's mobile, and …

BOBY YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant filed a bail cancellation application seeking to revoke the bail granted to the second opposite party, the father‑in‑law of the deceased, on the ground that he allegedly threatened the first informant after being released on bail. The application cited Sections 85 and 80(2) of the Bail …

SHIVA TYAGIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Shiva Tyagi was charged under Section 103(1) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of the Arms Act for the murder of a deceased, with the firearm recovered and sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory. After a first bail application was rejected, a second bail application was filed, contending that …

SURAJ KALIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Suraj Kali, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was implicated in a dowry‑death case (Crime No. 205 of 2026) under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the IPC, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that the allegations were vague, that there was no …

SMT SHEELA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Smt Sheela Devi, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the B.N.S and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that she was falsely implicated, that there was no material to support a presumption of dowry death, and that she …

RAJU BHARTIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, husband of a woman who died by hanging, sought bail in a criminal case alleging dowry harassment under Sections 80(2), 85 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the B.N.S. Act and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act. He argued that the charge sheet had been filed, there was no need for custodial …

RAMDAUD GOND RAMDEV GONDversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ramdaud Gond, father‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, in a case registered under Sections 80(2), 85, 61(2) of the B.N.S. Act and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, with no material showing …

GAURAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Gaurav, who was charged under sections 137(2) and 65(1) of the B.N.S., sections 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act and section 3(2)V of the S.C.S.T. Act for an alleged offence involving the alleged enticement of a minor. The applicant argued …

KUNDAN SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Kundan Singh, the father‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Sections 80(2), 115(2) and 85 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act, 1961. He contended that he was falsely implicated, that there was no material to invoke the presumption of dowry death, and that his …

SATISH RAJBHARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Satish Rajbhar in a criminal case (Crime No. 220 of 2026) involving alleged offences under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act. The applicant argued that the victim’s recorded …

VISHALversusSTATE OF U.P.

Vishal, the brother‑in‑law of the alleged victim, was arrested in a case (Crime No. 181 of 2026) alleging that he and his father disrobed the victim and attempted rape during a property dispute. The victim and her husband, who is also a witness, later testified that the incident was a scuffle …

RAMSHANKAR @ BIYAJUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Ramshankar @ Biyaju, who was arrested in connection with offences under Sections 120B, 366, 323, 504, 506 and 376D of the IPC. The FIR alleged that the applicant had assisted a co‑accused in kidnapping the victim, but the victim’s …

SHIVAM AGARWALversusSTATE OF U.P.

Shivam Agarwal applied for bail in a criminal case where a charge under Section 27A of the NDPS Act was added after he had already been granted bail for other charges. He had been in jail since 3 April 2026 and argued that the material before the court was the same, warranting bail for the new …

RAJDEEP RAJAWATversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a second bail application filed by Rajdeep Rajawat, who is charged under several sections of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly abducting a victim and firing at him. The first bail plea was denied, but the applicant argued that the primary witness and the victim have …

SONUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant Sonu, husband of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Section 85, Section 80(2) of the B.N.S. and the Dowry Prohibition Act. While the deceased's parents initially supported the prosecution, they later turned hostile, stating that Sonu never demanded dowry and that the …

VIKAS KUMARversusTHE STATE OF U.P.

Vikas Kumar, the husband of a woman who died by hanging, applied for bail in a case under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant argued that the dowry demand allegation was vague, that he had no prior criminal record, and …

UDIT SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered the bail application of Udit Sharma, accused under IPC sections 302, 120-B, 34, 420, 467, 468 and 471 for a murder case. The prosecution’s case relied on statements of several witnesses, many of whom were later hostile or did not support the prosecution, and the recording …

SUNEEL SAGARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Suneel Sagar, husband of a deceased woman, in a criminal case (Crime No. 561 of 2025) involving alleged dowry demands and related offences under the IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant argued that the deceased committed …

SADIQversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The applicant, Sadiq, filed a bail application (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19006 of 2025) before the Allahabad High Court after being convicted on 25 May 2026. Counsel for the applicant argued that since the trial had concluded and a conviction was recorded, the bail application was no …

HITESH RAOversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Hitesh Rao, husband of a woman who had committed suicide, in a dowry‑death case (Crime No. 483 of 2025) under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. While the deceased’s parents and siblings …

CHANDRAWATI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Chandrawati Devi, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who had died by suicide following a domestic dispute. The applicant argued that she was falsely implicated in a dowry‑death case under Sections 85, 80(2) of the BNS Act and Section 4 of the Dowry …

ASHISH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Ashish Kumar in Criminal Case No. 27 of 2025, which involved charges under Sections 137(2), 87 and 65(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 5(1) and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The …

BALRAM PANDEY URF BALIRAM PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The applicant, Balram Pandey, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 335 of 2025) under Sections 65(2) of the BNS Act and Sections 5M/6 of the POCSO Act for alleged rape of an eight‑year‑old girl. The applicant claimed false implication, citing the victim’s medical report as showing no injuries …

OM PRAKASH NISHADversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a second bail application filed by Om Prakash Nishad, who is charged under IPC sections 376, 506, 452 and IT Act section 67 for alleged rape, intimidation, house‑trespass and possession of an obscene video. The applicant contended that the victim’s statements and the …

ATUL TRIPATHIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Atul Tripathi, who is alleged to be involved in the death of his daughter‑in‑law, a suicide by hanging that the prosecution treats as a dowry‑related offence under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the BNS Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act. The …

RAMVEER MAURYversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ramveer Maury, the father‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He contended that there was no material linking him to any dowry harassment and that the presumption of dowry …

SUSHAMAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sushama, the unmarried sister‑in‑law of a woman who had died by suicide, under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant argued that she was falsely implicated, that there was no specific …

ASHA PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P.

Asha Pandey, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by hanging, was charged under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that she was falsely implicated, that there was no material showing she harassed the deceased, and that the …

MANJUversusSTATE OF U.P.

Manju, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Sections 85, 80(2) of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that the first informant’s statement was hostile, there was no material linking her to any dowry harassment, and the presumption …

TANMAY HIRA VISWASversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, husband of a woman who died from smothering injuries, sought bail in a dowry death case filed under Sections 80(2), 85, 115(2) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The State opposed bail, citing the post‑mortem report, witness …

VINOD SAVITAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Vinod Savita, the father‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under sections 80(2) and 85 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He applied for bail, arguing that there is no material showing he harassed the deceased or that the presumption of dowry death applies. The prosecution opposed bail …

ANUJ KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Anuj Kumar, the husband of a woman who died by suicide within seven years of marriage. The charges under Sections 498A, 323, 304B of the IPC, Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 were pending. …

SHOLEversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, husband of a woman who allegedly committed suicide, sought bail in a dowry death case filed under sections 80(2) and 85 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He claimed false implication, lack of material linking him to cruelty, and a clean …

URMILA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Urmila Devi, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide after a brief scuffle with her husband. The FIR did not originally name Urmila Devi, but she was later implicated under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the B.N.S. and the Police 3/4 D.P. Act. …

DEEPAK AHIRWARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Deepak Ahirwar, husband of a woman who allegedly committed suicide. He was charged under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the Indian Evidence Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. During trial, the deceased's father, brother …

DINESHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Dinesh, accused in a criminal case under Sections 85, 80(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, for allegedly failing to obtain medical treatment for his seriously ill wife who later died of septicemia. The …

ROHITversusSTATE OF U.P.

Rohit, accused under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 103(1), 238 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(5) of the B.N.S., applied for bail while the trial was pending. His first bail plea was rejected, but a co‑accused, Krishna, had been released on bail on similar factual grounds. Rohit argued that …

SMT SUDHA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Smt. Sudha Singh, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under IPC sections 80(2), 85, 352, 351(3) and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that she was falsely implicated, that there was no material to support a presumption of dowry death, and that she …

BRIJPAL ALIAS SOPALIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Brijpal alias Sopali, accused of his wife's suicide under sections 85, 80(2), 108 of the B.N.S. and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant argued that the death resulted from a dispute over the victim's alleged relationship with a neighbour, …

MANJUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Manju, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the B.N.S. and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant contended that she was falsely implicated, that there was no material showing dowry …

DUSHYANT YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Dushyant Yadav, husband of a woman who died by suicide within seven years of marriage, sought bail during trial for alleged dowry harassment leading to her death. He argued lack of material evidence of cruelty, no prior criminal record, and that custodial interrogation was …

SAMVATIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Samvati, mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide after a domestic dispute, was charged under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the B.N.S. Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that she was falsely implicated, that there was no material to establish a …

MOHAMMAD RAZA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicants, Mohammad Raza and Mohara, father‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law of a deceased woman, were arrested in connection with her death, which they claim was an accidental fall from a rooftop. They contend that the only allegation of assault pertains to the deceased's husband and that they have …

MITIYA @ MITHIYAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Mitiya, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by self‑immolation, under Sections 80(2), 85 of the Evidence Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant argued that the dying declaration implicated only the …

SMT LALPATIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Smt Lalpati, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that she was falsely implicated, that there was no material to establish cruelty or a dowry‑death presumption, …

DEEPAKversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Deepak, accused in Crime No. 210 of 2026 under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including offences relating to outraging modesty and sexual assault. The applicant argued that the victim’s statements under Sections 180 and …

RAJKUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Rajkumar in a criminal case (Crime No. 179 of 2026) alleging abduction and forced sexual relations with a major girl. The prosecution’s FIR alleged that the accused enticed the victim away, while the victim’s statements under Sections 180 and 183 …

KISHORIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Kishori, accused in Crime No. 60 of 2026 for offences including rape and assault under sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 333 and 64 of the B.N.S. The FIR was lodged more than a month after the alleged incident via Section 173(4) and was based on a …

SMT SANTOSHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Smt Santosh, the mother‑in‑law of a deceased woman who died from burn injuries, applied for bail in a case under Sections 85, 103 and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that the family, including the applicant, harassed the deceased to obtain a loan and that an …

AMAN @ IKRAMversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Aman @ Ikram, was not named in the FIR but was implicated in a criminal case (Crime No. 207 of 2025) based solely on the recovery of a mobile phone and SIM card belonging to the deceased. The recovery memo claimed videographic evidence under Section 105 of the B.N.S., but no such …

SMT LATAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Smt. Lata applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 752 of 2025) under Section 103(1) of the B.N.S., alleging that her drunken husband assaulted her and died accidentally during a scuffle when she tried to protect herself. The prosecution’s case is based mainly on her confessional statement, …

VIPIN KUMAR GANGWAR @ RAJAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Vipin Kumar Gangwar in a criminal case involving alleged rape, blackmail, and the sending of obscene messages under sections of the Indian Penal Code and the POCSO Act. The prosecution alleged that the accused, a former neighbour, drugged the …

RAMAWATI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ramawati Devi, the mother of a co-accused, applied for bail in a case registered under Sections 3(5), 115(2), 352, 351(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 103(1) of the B.N.S. She argued that she was falsely implicated, that the FIR contained only general allegations against her, and that a …

RAHUL KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Rahul Kumar, who was charged under several IPC provisions and the POCSO Act for allegedly fathering a child with a mentally retarded victim. The prosecution’s case relied on the victim’s identification, but the victim could not clearly …

PREMA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered the bail application of Prema Devi in Criminal Case No. 367 of 2025, where the prosecution relied solely on circumstantial evidence and no eye‑witness to the death of the victim. The applicant contended that there was no incriminating material against her, that …

SANDEEPversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Sandeep, who was implicated in a murder case (Crime No. 557 of 2025) after his name appeared in the confessional statement of the main accused, Harish Tyagi. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR, that there was no …

KISHAN VISHWAKARMAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Kishan Vishwakarma, was arrested in connection with a violent incident that resulted in the death of a relative of the first informant. The FIR alleged that the applicant and his family assaulted the informant's elder brother and that the applicant caused a head injury to the …

AZAD JAISWALversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Azad Jaiswal, a driver employed by the owner of a godown where large quantities of codeine‑based cough syrups were seized during a police raid. Jaiswal was arrested alongside the seizure but the prosecution’s material did not link him to the …

GULVEJversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant was arrested along with two co‑accused after police intercepted a vehicle carrying 2,845 bottles of Wenrex cough syrup, a codeine‑based preparation, without a licence. The applicant claimed the syrup was not a narcotic because it fell under Entry 35 of the Central Government …

DHANDEVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Dhandev in a criminal case (Crime No. 376/2025) involving alleged offences under the IPC and the NDPS Act for the procurement and alleged sale of codeine‑based cough syrups. The prosecution’s case centered on the main accused, Shivam Dwivedi, who …

MOHAMMAD FAHADversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Mohammad Fahad, who was arrested at Cheeoki Railway Station for allegedly possessing 477 bottles of codeine‑based cough syrup. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, that the forensic lab report did not confirm the presence of …

JOGI SAHANI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicants, the father‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, were charged under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. They contended that there was no material to show they harassed the deceased or that the presumption of dowry …

NARENDRA @ SONUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Narendra (Sonu), the husband of a woman who allegedly committed suicide within seven years of marriage. The applicant claimed false implication and argued there was no evidence of dowry-related cruelty, seeking release on bail under …

AVADH BIHARI @ BANDHUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Avadh Bihari, father‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the Evidence Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He contended that he was falsely implicated, that there was no material showing cruelty or dowry demand before the …

RISHIPAL @ SHRIPALversusSTATE OF UP

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Rishipal, the father‑in‑law of a woman who allegedly committed suicide, under Sections 80(2), 85 and 115(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, that there was no …

CHAMELI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Chameli Devi, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide after a domestic dispute, was charged under sections 85, 80(2), 115(2) of the B.N.S. and sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that she was falsely implicated, that there was no material to support a presumption of …

RAMVATIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ramvati, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was charged under sections 85 and 80(2) of the B.N.S. 2023 and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She applied for bail, arguing that there was no material to support a presumption of dowry death and that she had no prior criminal …

JAGPALversusSTATE OF UP

The applicant, husband of a woman who died by suicide within seven years of marriage, sought bail in a dowry death case (Criminal No. 175 of 2025) under Sections 85, 80(2) of the Bailable Non-suspect provisions and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He claimed false implication and no …

VIRENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Disposed off/Decided on merits

The applicant, Virendra Singh, was arrested in connection with a road‑traffic accident on 30‑08‑2025 that resulted in the death of a man. The FIR, lodged on 08‑09‑2025, alleged that the applicant and co‑accused had struck the deceased's scooter with a Bolero car, causing fatal injuries. The …

KHUB SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Khub Singh, the maternal uncle of a deceased woman, who was accused of strangulating her during a family dispute. The prosecution alleged that the deceased and her lover were confined and beaten before the alleged murder, but the post‑mortem …

JYOTI @ SONIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Jyoti @ Soni, accused in Crime No.215 of 2025 under Section 103(1) BNS for allegedly assaulting a deceased with a gaita. The prosecution’s evidence was weakened by the police’s failure to produce the forensic‑science‑lab report, colour …

SANOJversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Sanoj, accused in a murder case (Crime No. 374 of 2025) under IPC sections 103(1), 238(Ka), 3(5) BNS and Arms Act sections 4, 25, 27, 35. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR, that the eyewitness statements were …

SHAHANWAZ ALAM @ RAJAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Shahanwaz Alam, sought bail in a murder case (Crime No.101 of 2025) alleging that he was falsely implicated and that the offence should fall under Section 105 of the IPC rather than Section 103. The prosecution presented three eyewitnesses and CCTV footage showing the applicant …

SHESHNATH YADAV AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Sheshnath Yadav, Devbrat Yadav and Ankit Yadav in Crime No. 181 of 2026, charged under Sections 103(2), 61(2), 191(2), 191(3) and 238 of the BNS, 2023 for alleged involvement in a murder‑related assault. The applicants argued that they …

JAINULversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Jainul in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 16734 of 2026, relating to Crime No. 442 of 2025 under Sections 103(1), 238 of the Indian Penal Code and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The applicant was not named in the FIR but was mentioned as an …

SUJEET @ LALUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sujeet @ Lalu, accused of murder, causing disappearance of evidence and common intention under IPC sections 302, 201 and 34. The applicant argued that the FIR was lodged late, the eyewitness statement was omitted, and the police allegedly planted …

MANOJ KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Manoj Kumar, the husband of a murder victim, applied for bail in a trial concerning the killing of his wife and her daughter. The prosecution alleged that six persons, including the accused, shot the deceased, while the applicant claimed he was falsely implicated and was not present at the scene. …

ARSLANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant Arslan was arrested in connection with a case involving a 95% burnt body discovered on 17 December 2025, where the FIR initially named unknown persons. During investigation, a co-accused, Ehtasham, implicated Arslan in a confessional statement, but no other incriminating material was …

VIKRANT ALIAS BITTUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Vikrant alias Bittu, sought bail in a case involving offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. He was not named in the FIR and the first statement of the injured witness made no allegation against him; his name appeared only in a later statement recorded after a month, raising …

ABHINAYversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Abhinay, who was implicated in Crime No.143 of 2026 under several IPC sections, though his name was not originally in the FIR and no specific role or weapon was linked to him. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated and had no …

NARESH NISHADversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Naresh Nishad, who is charged under Sections 302 and 504 IPC for allegedly scuffling with and threatening to kill the deceased, whose body was later found. The applicant argued that there is no eye‑witness, no weapon recovered, and that …

LALDHAR YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

Laldhar Yadav, accused under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC for murder, applied for bail after being in custody since November 2022. The first bail application was rejected on the ground that he was the main accused. The applicant argued that most prosecution witnesses had already been examined and …

MUKESH TIWARI @ DEV KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad heard bail application No. 45444 of 2025 filed by Mukesh Tiwari @ Dev Kumar against the State of Uttar Pradesh. The applicant’s counsel, Rajesh Kumar Yadav, informed the court that the applicant no longer wishes to pursue the bail relief. The court noted …

WASIMversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Wasim in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8560 of 2026, relating to a 2013 case (Cr. No. 515 of 2013) with charges under IPC sections 364, 394, 302, 201 and 411. The applicant was not originally named in the FIR but later appeared in …

AMITversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Amit, who was arrested in connection with Crime No. 701 of 2025 involving offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 109(1), 103(1), 115(2), 352 of the BNS and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. Amit argued that the firearm injury to the …

SURATRAMversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Suratram, who was charged under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2) and 103(1) of the B.N.S. for allegedly beating and shooting a deceased person. The applicant argued that the firearm causing the fatal injury was linked to a co‑accused, that …

MEVALAL PRAJAPATIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Mevalal Prajapati, who was arrested on 19‑Oct‑2025 in connection with the murder of a deceased whose e‑rickshaw and a blood‑stained screwdriver were recovered on the applicant’s pointing out. The prosecution relied on the recovered …

PRADEEP CHAUHANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Pradeep Chauhan, sought bail in a murder case (Criminal No. 118 of 2024) charged under Sections 302, 120‑B and 34 of the IPC. He argued that he was not named in the FIR and that the CCTV footage showing him was recorded before the FIR was lodged, creating doubt about the prosecution’s …

AWDHESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered the bail application of Awdhesh Kumar, accused in a murder case (Crime No. 407 of 2025). The applicant contended that the FIR was based on mere apprehension, no one witnessed the incident, and the recovered blood‑stained knife was false because the procedure under …

RASHIDversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Rashid, sought bail in a trial for offences under Sections 302, 323 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code relating to a murder alleged to have occurred in Aligarh. He argued that he had been falsely implicated, that there were no eye‑witnesses, and that his right to a speedy trial was …

SADIMversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sadim, accused in a case involving multiple IPC offences including murder and attempt to murder. The applicant claimed he was hospitalized at the time of the incident and that no weapon was recovered, asserting that he was falsely implicated. The …

RAJESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Rajesh Kumar, who was arrested in connection with a murder case (Crime No.23 of 2026) under Sections 103(1), 238A and 61(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The applicant argued that the FIR and investigation specifically implicated the co‑accused …

AWADHESHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Awadhesh applied for bail in a case involving offences under several sections of the B.N.S. and the Arms Act. He claimed he was falsely implicated, being the father of co‑accused Surjeet and Sanjeet, with no direct evidence linking him to the firearm injury. The State opposed bail but did not …

UDAY @ KISHAN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Uday @ Kishan Kumar in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14615 of 2026, relating to Crime No. 874 of 2025 under IPC sections 103(1), 3(5), 61(2) BNS and Arms Act sections 3 and 25. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR and was …

DISU RAI ALIAS SUMIT RAIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Disu Rai (Sumit Rai), accused of rape and alleged suicide of a minor under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the POCSO Act. The applicant argued that the FIR was based solely on the mother’s allegation, there was no forensic …

CHANDAN SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Chandan Singh, who is charged under multiple sections of the Uttar Pradesh B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act in Crime No. 17 of 2026. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, that no specific role or weapon was linked to him, and …

NAKULversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Nakul, was arrested in connection with a murder despite not being named in the FIR, based on his alleged presence near the deceased's body and a message sent from his sister's phone. The co‑accused, Aniket, confessed to the strangulation, while other co‑accused have already been …

YATENDRA ALIAS PICHCHUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Yatendra alias Pichchu, was arrested along with five others in connection with the death of a three‑year‑old girl, alleged to have been thrown into a canal. During investigation, eye‑witness statements and CCTV footage indicated that the first informant, not the applicant, was …

MANOHAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Manohar Singh was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No. 0195 of 2025) involving multiple offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 351(2), 351(3) and 103(2) of the B.N.S., 2023. The FIR and witness statement alleged a collective involvement of 13 persons, but did not assign a …

KAMAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Kamal Singh was arrested in a murder case (Criminal No. 0206 of 2022) charged under Sections 302, 201, 120‑B, 420 and 34 of the IPC. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR and that his name only appeared in the statement of another accused, with no incriminating material linking him …

MANOJversusSTATE OF U.P.

Manoj applied for bail in Criminal Case No. 160 of 2025, charged under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 109 of the IPC. A prior bail application was rejected because the injured party alleged that Manoj struck him with a brass metal punch. In the second application, counsel argued that the primary …

RAVENDRA PAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Ravendra Pal Singh, was charged under Section 302 IPC for the death of his father‑in‑law. He claimed the death was accidental, caused by inhalation of an organophosphate insecticide, and that he was falsely implicated due to a property dispute. The FIR was lodged two years after the …

LALTI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Lalti Devi was charged under Section 302 IPC for allegedly strangling her five‑year‑old step‑daughter, based primarily on a confession to the complainant and without any eye‑witness. She has been in custody since January 2020 and the trial has progressed slowly, with only six of fourteen witnesses …

ASLAM @ SULTANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Aslam @ Sultan, was arrested in a murder case (Criminal Misc. No. 331 of 2025) despite not being named in the FIR; the only evidence against him was a mobile phone recovered after he pointed it out. No other incriminating material was found, and the specific assault allegation was …

VIJAYversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Vijay, who is charged with murder (strangulation) under Sections 140(1), 61(2), 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the BNS. The FIR alleges that Vijay took the deceased in his motorcycle on 17 August 2025 and the body was discovered five days later, but no …

SATYAPRAKASHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Satyaprakash, accused in a case under Section 103(1) B.N.S. for allegedly assaulting the deceased with a danda and kulhadi. The FIR and witness statement named four persons but did not assign a specific role to the applicant, and no …

SMT MITHLESH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Smt. Mithlesh and her brother‑in‑law Nawab, accused under IPC sections 191(2), 115(2) and 103(1) in a murder‑related case. The applicants argued that the FIR was based on a matrimonial dispute, that there was no incriminating material …

SALEEMversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Saleem in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14210 of 2026, seeking release in case No. 442 of 2025 under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. Saleem was not named in the FIR but was mentioned in a confessional statement of the accused …

TRIVENI PATHAKversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Triveni Pathak, accused in Crime No. 290/2025 under IPC Sections 103(1) and 238, the Bombay Narcotic Substances Act, and the Arms Act. The applicant argued that the FIR was lodged after the victim's body was recovered, there were no …

ATUL SINGH @ BABBU SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Atul Singh, was implicated in a murder case (Crime No. 445 of 2025) based on allegations from the deceased's family, but no direct incriminating material was found against him and no weapon was recovered at his instance. The applicant argued that a co-accused with an identical role …

PAPPU @ SHAHIDversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Pappu @ Shahid in a case involving multiple accused for the beating of Babu and Javed, which resulted in Babu's death. The applicant argued that the FIR made only general allegations against him, that co‑accused with similar roles had …

AMAN ALIAS KISHAN VISHVAKARMAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Aman alias Kishan Vishvakarma, who is charged under IPC sections 302, 394, 411, 120B and 34 for a crime alleged to have occurred in Varanasi. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR, that key evidence (blood‑stained brick, …

AMANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant sought bail in a criminal trial (Case No. 295 of 2024) for alleged offences under Sections 109, 103(1), 333 of the IPC and Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act. He claimed to be mentally unstable, alleging that a mental illness caused him to attack Aman and subsequently his wife, who …

AMIT KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Amit Kumar in a murder case (Crime No. 477 of 2025) under Sections 103(1), 115(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The applicant argued that the alleged blood‑stained knife was never actually recovered, that there were no eyewitnesses to its recovery, and …

LAXMIKANT @ DOLYversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Laxmikant @ Doly, was arrested in connection with a homicide alleged to have occurred three to four days before the body was recovered on 01‑07‑2025. The prosecution’s case relied on a missing‑person report, a post‑mortem indicating crush injuries, and motive suggested by the victim’s …

DEVENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Devendra Singh, who was charged under Sections 302 and 120B of the IPC for a murder that allegedly occurred on 09.04.2023, with the FIR lodged a year later under Section 156(3) of the CrPC. The applicant claimed innocence, lack of …

NEERAJ KUSHWAHAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Neeraj Kushwaha, was arrested in connection with a murder case (Criminal No. 228 of 2025) despite not being named in the FIR or the dying declaration, which implicated only co‑accused Mohit, Piyush and Aashu. He argued that his inclusion was a false implication arising solely from his …

RAJUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Raju, accused in Criminal Case No. 328 of 2025 for allegedly beating a victim who later died. The FIR and victim's statement implicated all three accused, but the post‑mortem showed a single head injury with no weapon recovered and no specific …

SHIVA TYAGIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Shiva Tyagi was charged with murdering his aunt under Section 103(1) of the B.N.S.S. and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. The applicant argued that there were no reliable eyewitnesses and that his alleged confession to police was not properly recorded, seeking bail after being in custody since …

ANISversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Anis, was arrested in connection with the murder of the son of the first informant, although his name was not mentioned in the FIR. The prosecution’s case rests on a statement recorded under Section 180 and the recovery of a 'danda' that bore no bloodstains. The applicant argued that …

SMT PREETIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Smt. Preeti, who was charged with murder under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the BNS in Crime No.207 of 2025. The applicant argued that the FIR was based merely on a matrimonial dispute, that she had no motive, no eyewitnesses, and no …

ANJUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Anju was arrested in a murder case (Criminal No. 440 of 2023) under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC for allegedly beating a cyclist with a lathi, leading to his death. The defence argued that the post‑mortem report showed only simple injuries that could not have caused death and suggested the victim …

HARIOMversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Hariom, who is accused under several IPC sections for allegedly running over a tractor that caused the deaths of Maan Pal and Amar Singh. The applicant argued that the FIR and witness statements contain contradictions, only three of the …

SATYAM SHIVHAREversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Satyam Shivhare, was arrested in connection with a violent incident in Banda district where the deceased was allegedly beaten by a co‑accused identified as Yuvraj. The FIR does not name the applicant, and evidence such as a shop‑owner’s statement and CCTV footage suggest the applicant …

ZAKIRversusSTATE OF U.P.

Zakir was arrested in connection with a murder after the victim's body was recovered and a spade was allegedly found at his residence. The applicant sought bail under Sections 103(1), 140(1) and 238 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, arguing that there was no incriminating material against him and …