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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release of applicant Sarik @ Khania on bail in Case Crime No. 400 of 2025 on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to: (i) no tampering with evidence during trial; (ii) no pressurizing/intimidating prosecution witnesses; (iii) appearance before the trial court on dates fixed; breach entitles the prosecution to seek bail cancellation before this Court; identity, status and residence proof of applicant and sureties to be verified by the court concerned before bonds are accepted.

Issue for consideration

Whether applicant Sarik @ Khania, accused in Case Crime No. 400 of 2025 under Sections 103(1), 309(4), 3(5) BNS and 4/25 Arms Act (P.S. Qwarsi, District Aligarh), is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of trial, in particular on the ground of parity with co-accused Ali Mohammad and Abid Ali already granted bail by this Court.

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the judgments of the Supreme Court (Paras Ram Vishnoi; Satender Kumar Antil) and of this Court (Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha), 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 with the co-accused already enlarged on bail, and allowed the bail application 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 the conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence, shall not pressurize/intimidate prosecution witnesses, and shall appear before the trial court on dates fixed; on breach, the prosecution may move a bail cancellation application before this Court, and identity, status and residence proof of applicant and sureties must be verified before bonds are accepted.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — grant on ground of parity — applicant Sarik @ Khania in Case Crime No. 400 of 2025 under Sections 103(1), 309(4), 3(5) BNS and 4/25 Arms Act, P.S. Qwarsi, District Aligarh, in custody since 08.08.2025 — similarly placed co-accused Ali Mohammad and Abid Ali already enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 29.10.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 35827 of 2025 — parity not disputed by the State — reliance placed on Prabhakar Tewari (pendency of several cases alone no basis to refuse bail if bail case otherwise made out), Paras Ram Vishnoi, Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha and Satender Kumar Antil — bail allowed on ground of parity without expressing opinion on merits; release on personal bond and two sureties each in like amount with standard conditions (no tampering, no intimidation of witnesses, attendance on fixed dates), breach permitting bail cancellation application; observations not to affect trial Judge's independent assessment of testimony.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42388 of 2025

Sarik @ Khania

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

Court No. - 67

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

List has been revised.

Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.400 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 309(4), 3(5) BNS and 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station Qwarsi, District Aligarh, during the pendency of trial.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused persons, Ali Mohammad and Abid Ali have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 29.10.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 35827 of 2025. The applicant is languishing in jail since 8.8.2025. The criminal history assigned to the applicant has been explained. 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 have not been disputed by him.

The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020 (11) SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases

BAIL No. 42388 of 2025

2

against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case of bail is made out.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and also taking into 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- Sarik @ Khania 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.)

December 2, 2025 Vikas Verma

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