Jaihind Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

Jaihind Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail application allowed. Applicant Jaihind Rajbhar to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, sureties to be verified before the release order, subject to the conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence during trial, shall not pressurise/intimidate prosecution witnesses, and shall appear before the trial court on dates fixed; breach of any condition shall be ground for cancellation of bail.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Jaihind Rajbhar, involved in Case Crime No.144 of 2019 under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C., Police Station Shadiabad, District Ghazipur, is entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of trial.

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the fact that the informant has turned hostile, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court held that the applicant has made out a case for bail and allowed the bail application.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the sureties to be verified before issuance of the release order, subject to conditions: (i) the applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate the prosecution witnesses; and (iii) the applicant shall appear before the trial court on dates fixed; breach of any condition shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

Key takeaways

The observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.obiter¶¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL GRANTED — Offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C. (Case Crime No.144 of 2019, Police Station Shadiabad, District Ghazipur) — applicant not named in the FIR and alleged falsely implicated — during trial the informant, examined as PW-1, did not support the prosecution story and completely resiled from his earlier statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.; his earlier Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement had merely allayed apprehension against the applicant and was characterised as weak evidence — co-accused on similar footing already enlarged on bail by the trial court (parity) — counsel stated no criminal history and incarceration since 20.12.2019 — Learned A.G.A. opposed but could not dispute the submissions — Held: taking into consideration the hostility of the informant and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the applicant has made out a case for bail; release on personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, sureties to be verified, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence and intimidating witnesses and to attend trial on fixed dates; breach to be ground for cancellation — observations made in granting bail shall not affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion. (Krishan Pahal, J.) — Allahabad High Court, Court No. 67, decided October 8, 2025.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26850 of 2025

Jaihind Rajbhar

.....Applicant(s)

Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shailendra Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 67

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

List has been revised.

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

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.144 of 2019, under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C., Police Station Shadiabad, District Ghazipur, during the pendency of trial.

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is not named in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. During trial, the informant was examined as PW-1 and he has not supported the prosecution story. He has completely resiled from his earlier statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., while earlier on during his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., he had allayed apprehension against the applicant that too was a weak kind of evidence. There is no likelihood of conviction of the applicant in the present case.

Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the co-accused person, whose case was of similar footing to the applicant, has already been enlarged on bail by the trial court. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 20.12.2019 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he

BAIL No. 26850 of 2025

2

will not misuse the liberty of bail.

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.

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 informant has turned hostile, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

Let the applicant- Jaihind Rajbhar , who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial.

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

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

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

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

October 8, 2025 (Ravi Kant)

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