Krishna Kumar Alias Kallu vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

Krishna Kumar Alias Kallu vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Krishna Kumar alias Kallu ordered 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: (i) appear on dates fixed by the trial court; (ii) not tamper with prosecution evidence; (iii) not pressurize prosecution witnesses; breach of any condition entitles the prosecution to move a bail cancellation application before this Court.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Krishna Kumar alias Kallu should be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 115 of 2025, under Section 103(1) B.N.S., Police Station Jalalabad, District Shahjahanpur, during the pendency of the trial. +1 more

Court's answer

With the applicant confined for more than seven months, the charge-sheet already submitted leaving no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension brought forward by the State that the applicant, if enlarged, would tamper with evidence, delay the trial or intimidate witnesses, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail, without commenting on the merits of the case.

Ratio / Principle

This Court prima facie finds that, as per the first information report and the statement of the informant under Section 180 B.N.S.S., the specific role of firing upon the father of the informant was assigned to co-accused Sumer, distinguishing the applicant's case.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted. Vivek Varma, J. (Single Judge), High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 38778 of 2025, decided November 6, 2025: Krishna Kumar alias Kallu, in custody since 28.03.2025 in Case Crime No. 115 of 2025 under Section 103(1) B.N.S., Police Station Jalalabad, District Shahjahanpur, ordered released on bail. Prima facie, per the first information report and the informant's statement under Section 180 B.N.S.S., the specific role of firing upon the father of the informant had been assigned to co-accused Sumer, distinguishing the applicant's case; with the charge-sheet submitted, confinement exceeding seven months, no prospect of early conclusion of trial, and no State-raised apprehension of evidence-tampering, trial-delay or witness-intimidation, the Court held the applicant entitled to bail without commenting on merits — on a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount, conditioned on appearance on trial-court-fixed dates, non-tampering with prosecution evidence and non-pressurizing of prosecution witnesses, breach permitting the prosecution to seek bail cancellation before this Court.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38778 of 2025

Krishna Kumar Alias Kallu

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Karunesh Narayan Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Court No. - 64

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nagendra Kumar Mishra, learned Brief Holder for the State-opposite party.

The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 115 of 2025, under Section 103(1) B.N.S., Police Station Jalalabad, District Shahjahanpur during the pendency of the trial.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the first information report and the statement of the informant under Section 180 B.N.S.S., specific role of firing upon the father of the informant has been assigned to co-accused Sumer. The case of the applicant is clearly distinguishable from that of coaccused Sumer. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in Paragraph-2 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 28.03.2025 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

Learned Brief Holder for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that as per the first information report and the statement of the informant under Section 180 B.N.S.S., specific role of firing upon the father of the informant has been assigned to co-accused

BAIL No. 38778 of 2025

2

Sumer. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than seven months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Let the applicant- Krishna Kumar alias Kallu, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

November 6, 2025 SKT/-

(Vivek Varma,J.)

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