Dismissed¶14

Rashid v. State of U.P.

Bail – Regular bail during trial

Allahabad HC6 May 2026BAIL/14596/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14596 of 2026, Rashid v. State of U.P., decided May 7, 2026 (Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, J.): bail during trial refused in murder case (Sections 302, 323, 34 IPC, P.S. Rorawar, Aligarh); eyewitness account of knife assault and recovery of blood-stained knife on applicant's pointing out held to outweigh four years' incarceration and part-heard trial (8 witnesses examined); application rejected.

What did the court decide?

Bail during trial refused because there is a specific allegation that the applicant assaulted the deceased with knife, witnessed by several eye witnesses, and a blood-stained knife was recovered on his pointing out. ¶13

Rashid Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14596 of 2026

¶3

Rashid

¶4

	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Lal Bahadur, Upendra Kumar Pushkar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 67

¶6

HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.

¶7

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

¶8

Instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 49 of 2022, under Sections 302, 323, 34 IPC, Police Station- Rorawar, District Aligarh.

¶9

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case though there is no eye witness of the incident. The applicant is in jail for more than four years and only 8 witnesses have been examined till date. Therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail during trial, as his right to speedy trial has been infringed due to non-completion of the trial. The applicant has explained the criminal history of one case. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶10

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is eye witnesses of the incident, who clearly stated and supported the FIR version and also stated that the applicant cut the neck of the deceased with knife and on pointing out of the applicant a blood stained knife was also recovered. It is further submitted that post mortem report also shows that the cause of death of deceased is injury on his neck, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶11

BAIL No. 14596 of 2026

¶12

¶13

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the fact that there is specific allegation against the applicant for assaulting the deceased with knife which was witnessed by several eye witnesses coupled with the fact that a blood stained knife was also recovered on pointing out of the applicant, therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

¶14

Accordingly, the present bail application is rejected .

¶15

(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)

¶16

May 7, 2026 A.Kr.

¶17

Digitally signed by :- AJAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rashid v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rashid v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Lalti Devi Vs State of U.P.

Laxmikant @ Doly Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.

Aslam @ Sultan vs State of U.P.

Manoj vs State of U.P.

Kartar vs State of U.P.