Vipanshu Alias Vippu Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Vipanshu Alias Vippu Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release of applicant Vipanshu Alias Vippu on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions (i)-(iii) regarding non-tampering with evidence, non-intimidation of prosecution witnesses and appearance before the trial court.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Vipanshu Alias Vippu, in custody since 11.3.2025 with no criminal history and whose role is identical to co-accused Pushpendra Singh already enlarged on bail, is entitled to release on bail in Case Crime No. 65 of 2025 on the ground of parity.

Court's answer

Considering the facts, submissions, evidence on record and the judgments in Paras Ram Vishnoi, Nanha and Satender Kumar Antil, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court held that the applicant has made out a case for bail on the ground of parity, and the bail application is allowed on that ground.

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, subject to conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence during trial, shall not pressurize/intimidate prosecution witnesses, and shall appear before the trial court on dates fixed; on breach of any condition the prosecution may move a bail-cancellation application before this Court; identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties to be verified by the court concerned before bonds are accepted.

Key takeaways

It was made clear that the observations made in granting bail shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion on the testimony of the witnesses.obiter¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (Krishan Pahal, J.; decided October 8, 2025) — Bail granted purely on parity. In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 31045 of 2025, the applicant Vipanshu Alias Vippu, accused in Case Crime No. 65 of 2025 under Sections 109, 115(2), 351(2), 352, 103, 191(2), 191(3), 190, 324(5), 326(छ), 3(5), 333 BNS, P.S. Bachhraun, District Amroha, and in custody since 11.3.2025 with no criminal history, was held entitled to bail because his role is identical to that of co-accused Pushpendra Singh, already enlarged on bail by the Court vide order dated 7.8.2025 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 22546 of 2025. Relying on Paras Ram Vishnoi v. Director, CBI (MANU/SCOR/22410/2021), Nanha s/o Nabhan Kha v. State of U.P. (1993 Cri.L.J. 938) and Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022 SCC OnLine SC 825), and expressly without expressing any opinion on merits, the Court allowed the bail application on the ground of parity, directing release on a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount, conditioned on non-tampering with evidence, non-intimidation of prosecution witnesses and attendance before the trial court, with liberty to move for cancellation on breach, and clarifying that the bail observations will not affect the trial Judge's independent assessment of witness testimony.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31045 of 2025

Vipanshu Alias Vippu

.....Applicant(s) Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Avijit Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 67

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

List has been revised.

Heard Sri Avijit Saxena, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Abhishek Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.65 of 2025, under Sections 109, 115(2), 351(2), 352, 103, 191(2), 191(3), 190, 324(5), 326(छ), 3(5), 333 BNS, Police Station Bachhraun, District Amroha, during the pendency of trial.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Pushpendra Singh has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 7.8.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.22546 of 2025. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.3.2025, having no criminal history. He further submitted that 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.

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused and of no criminal history of the applicant, have not been disputed by him.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and also taking into

BAIL No. 31045 of 2025

2

consideration the judgment of the Supreme Court passed in the case of Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and the judgment of this Court passed in the case of Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Cri.L.J. 938 coupled with the judgment of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825 , 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 on the ground of parity. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

Let the applicant- Vipanshu Alias Vippu involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

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

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate 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, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

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 on the testimony of the witnesses.

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

October 8, 2025 Vikas Verma

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad