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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Vinit 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 issuance of release order; subject to conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence, 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 applicant Vinit, accused in Case Crime No.41 of 2025 under Sections 191(2), 140(1), 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) BNS, P.S. Shivala Kalan, District Bijnor, is entitled to release on bail during trial on the ground of parity with co-accused Mani, already enlarged on bail.

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in light of the cited judgments (Nanha; Paras Ram Vishnoi; Satender Kumar Antil), the applicant has made out a case for bail and the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

Key takeaways

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¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail allowed on parity — Allahabad High Court (Krishan Pahal, J.), order dated 13.10.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 28687 of 2025, enlarges applicant Vinit on bail in Case Crime No. 41 of 2025 (Sections 191(2), 140(1), 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) BNS), P.S. Shivala Kalan, District Bijnor, solely on the ground of parity with similarly placed co-accused Mani, already enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 27.08.2025 in Bail Application No. 25266 of 2025 — a parity the A.G.A. did not dispute. No criminal history; in custody since 17.03.2025. Decision reached in light of Nanha v. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938, Paras Ram Vishnoi v. Director, CBI, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021, and Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51. Release on personal bond and two like sureties (to be verified first), with conditions against tampering with evidence and pressurising witnesses and an obligation to appear before the trial court; breach cancellable; bail observations not to fetter the trial judge's independent opinion.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28687 of 2025

Vinit

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Byas Kumar Prasad, Sanskar Gaur
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 67

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

List has been revised.

Heard Sri Byas Kumar Prasad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.41 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 140(1), 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) BNS, Police Station- Shivala Kalan, DistrictBijnor, during the pendency of trial.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Mani, has already been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.08.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.25266 of 2025, as such, since the role of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. There is no criminal history of the applicant. He is languishing in jail since 17.03.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgements passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another , (2022) 10 SCC 51 , the Court is of the

BAIL No. 28687 of 2025

2

view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

Let the applicant- Vinit , 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 13, 2025

Saif

Digitally signed by :- SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad