Ali Hasan vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

Ali Hasan vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, Ali Hasan, arraigned in Case Crime No. 274 of 2018 under Sections 302, 120B and 34 I.P.C. (PS Jarcha, District Gautam Budh Nagar), should be enlarged on bail when the trial is at its conclusive end.

Court's answer

Taking into account that the trial has reached its conclusive end (prosecution evidence closed after nine witnesses, case at Section 313 CrPC stage), this Court found the applicant unfit for grant of bail and rejected the bail application as devoid of merits, in line with the Supreme Court's position in X vs. State of Rajasthan, 2024 INSC 909, that once a trial has commenced it should be allowed to reach its final conclusion.

Ratio / Principle

The Court directed that the pending case before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab, 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India, (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment.

Key takeaways

The observations made in the judgment are limited to the facts pertaining to disposal of the bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.obiter¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Court No. 67; Hon'ble Krishan Pahal, J.), judgment dated 21 November 2025, rejected Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 22370 of 2025 filed by Ali Hasan seeking enlargement in Case Crime No. 274 of 2018 under Sections 302, 120B and 34 I.P.C., Police Station Jarcha, District Gautam Budh Nagar. Per the Trial Court status report dated 17.11.2025, prosecution evidence stood closed after nine witnesses and the case was fixed for statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; the trial being at its conclusive end, the Court held the applicant unfit for bail, taking into account the Supreme Court's holding in X vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., 2024 INSC 909, that a trial once commenced should be allowed to reach its final conclusion. The trial court was further directed to decide the case expeditiously, absent legal impediment, per Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab, 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India, (2017) 5 SCC 702. Observations were expressly confined to the bail disposal and declared to have no bearing on the merits during trial. The applicant had been in custody since 09.11.2018.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22370 of 2025

Ali Hasan

	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Sabya Sachee Rai, Suneel Kumar Rai
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 67

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

List has been revised.

Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

Heard Sri Suneel Kumar Rai, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.274 of 2018, under Sections 302, 120B and 34 I.P.C., Police Station Jarcha, District Gautam Budh Nagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the star witness has been discharged by the prosecution as it has weakened their case. The trial is at its conclusive end. There is no likelihood of applicant tampering with evidence or being at flight risk. The applicant is in jail since 09.11.2018 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

This Court had called for the status of trial from the concerned Trial Court. As per the said status report dated 17.11.2025, the prosecution evidence has been closed after examining nine witnesses and the case is fixed for statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

BAIL No. 22370 of 2025

2

The Supreme Court in case of X vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. , 2024 INSC 909 , has held that once the trial has commenced, it should be allowed to reach to its final conclusion, which may either result in conviction or acquittal of the accused. The bail should not be normally granted to the accused after the charge has been framed. It should also not be granted by looking into the discrepancies here or there in the deposition.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the trial is at its conclusive end, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected .

However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702 , if there is no legal impediment.

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

November 21, 2025

(Ravi Kant)

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad