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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted to applicant Sahil on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties and conditions (no tampering with evidence; no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses; appearance before the trial court on dates fixed); breach of conditions to be a ground for cancellation of bail.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Sahil, arraigned in Case Crime No. 64 of 2025 under Sections 103(1), 140(2), 238, 3(5) of BNS, is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of trial on the ground of parity with co-accused Lav, who has already been enlarged on bail.

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances, submissions of counsel, evidence on record, pending trial, and the judgements in Nanha (1993 Crl.L.J. 938), Paras Ram Vishnoi (MANU/SCOR/22410/2021) and Satender Kumar Antil ((2022) 10 SCC 51), and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail; the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

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 verification of sureties and conditions that he will not tamper with evidence, will not pressurise/intimidate prosecution witnesses, and will appear before the trial court on dates fixed; breach of conditions shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

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¶¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — grant on parity — applicant Sahil sought bail in Case Crime No. 64 of 2025 under Sections 103(1), 140(2), 238, 3(5) of BNS, Police Station Govind Nagar, District Mathura, during pendency of trial — applicant not named in FIR, name surfaced only in statement of co-accused; in jail since 04.02.2025 with no criminal history — similarly placed co-accused Lav already enlarged on bail by the High Court vide order dated 16.10.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 24889 of 2025, a fact not disputed by the A.G.A. — Court, without expressing any opinion on merits and in the light of Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P. (1993 Crl.L.J. 938), Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. Director, CBI (MANU/SCOR/22410/2021) and Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI ((2022) 10 SCC 51), held the applicant entitled to bail and allowed the application on the ground of parity — release directed on personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence and intimidating witnesses and an undertaking to appear before the trial court; breach to invite cancellation — observations in the bail order not to affect the trial Judge's independent assessment.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43468 of 2025

Sahil

.....Applicant(s)

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

Court No. - 67

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

List has been revised.

Heard Sri Devesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 64 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 140(2), 238, 3(5) of BNS, Police Station - Govind Nagar, District - Mathura, during the pendency of trial.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Lav, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 16.10.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 24889 of 2025. It is further submitted that since the case of the applicant is at par to the co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

Learned counsel has also stated that the applicant is not named in the FIR. His name has come in the statement of co-accused person which has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. The applicant is languishing in jail since 04.02.2025, having no criminal history. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.

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

BAIL No. 43468 of 2025

2

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, evidence on record, pending trial and in the 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 judgement passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 coupled with the judgement of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 , without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

Let the applicant- Sahil , 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 will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

iii) The applicant will 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.)

December 10, 2025 Siddhant

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad