Allowed¶26

Irshan Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2025BAIL/12048/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Irshan Khan granted bail on parity with co-accused Manish Kumar (bailed in Bail No. 11862 of 2025); Case Crime/FIR No. 915 of 2025, Ss. 303(2), 317(4), 317(5), 317(2) BNS 2023; P.S. Kotwali Sadar, Dist. Lakhimpur Kheri; Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12048 of 2025; Karunesh Singh Pawar, J.; decided 2 December 2025; conditions incl. S. 229-A IPC and S. 313 Cr.P.C. appearances; applicant in jail since 26.10.2025; no opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to applicant-Irshan Khan in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 915 of 2025 on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount, subject to the imposed conditions. ¶26

Irshan Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted to applicant-Irshan Khan in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 915 of 2025 on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount, subject to the imposed conditions.

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, involved in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 915 of 2025 under Sections 303(2), 317(4), 317(5) and 317(2) of BNS, 2023 (P.S. Kotwali Sadar, District Lakhimpur Kheri), should be enlarged on bail, particularly on parity with the co-accused who has been granted bail.

¶11

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, and the bail order passed for the co-accused, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court found it a fit case for granting bail on the ground of parity.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

The applicant was ordered to be released on bail in the aforesaid FIR/case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount, subject to conditions: presence before the trial court on each fixed date (personally or through counsel, failing which action under Section 229-A IPC); personal appearance at opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of Section 313 Cr.P.C. statement (deliberate absence may be treated as abuse of liberty of bail); no tampering with prosecution witnesses; no indulgence in illegal activities during bail; and liberty to the trial court to cancel bail on breach of these conditions.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH), COURT NO. 15 (KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.), DECEMBER 2, 2025 — Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12048 of 2025: Irshan Khan v. State of U.P. Applicant booked in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 915 of 2025 under Sections 303(2), 317(4), 317(5) and 317(2) of BNS, 2023, Police Station Kotwali Sadar, District Lakhimpur Kheri; in custody since 26.10.2025, with one criminal history explained in the bail application. Co-accused Manish Kumar had already been granted bail in Bail No. 11862 of 2025. Considering the nature of allegations and the co-accused's bail order, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court held it a fit case for grant of bail on the ground of parity. Applicant directed to be released on a personal bond with two reliable sureties of the like amount, subject to conditions: attendance before the trial court on all fixed dates (default actionable under Section 229-A IPC); personal appearance at opening of case, framing of charge and recording of Section 313 Cr.P.C. statement, deliberate absence being treatable as abuse of bail liberty; no tampering with prosecution witnesses; no illegal activities; and trial-court liberty to cancel bail on breach. Bail application allowed.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12048 of 2025

Irshan Khan

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)

¶7

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Desh Raj Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 15

¶9

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶11

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Manish Kumar, who is involved in F.I.R./Case Crime No.915 of 2025, under Sections 303(2), 317(4), 317(5) and 317(2) of BNS, 2023, Police Station-Kotwali Sadar, District-Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶12

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. Learned counsel for applicant further submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR and false recovery has been made which indicates that 30 bhagwa flags, 8 patka, 1 T- shirt and 9 school banners have been recovered from his possession. The applicant has one criminal history which has been explained in para 21 of the bail application.

¶13

It is lastly contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 26.10.2025.

¶14

The co-accused Manish Kumar has been granted bail vide order passed in Bail No.11862 of 2025.

¶15

Learned A.G.A has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he has

¶16

BAIL No. 12048 of 2025

¶17

¶18

not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, bail order of the co-accused, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail on the ground of parity.

¶20

Let applicant-Irshan Khan be released on bail in the aforesaid F.I.R./case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶21

(1) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

(2) 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 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶23

(3) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶24

(4) The applicant will not indulge in any illegal activities during the period of bail.

¶25

(5) In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court would be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

¶26

Bail application is allowed.

¶27

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶28

December 2, 2025 kkb/

¶29

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Irshan Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irshan Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vinay Kumar Sharma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Anurag Mehrotra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Rajya Kar U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Rakesh Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. State Estate Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Abhishek Kumar vs Union of India Thru. Deptt. Revenue Directorate GST Intelligence Lko.

Mohd. Javed vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Ramesh Chandra Srivastava and 183 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Rural Development Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko. and Another