Vijay Raj @ Nachchu vs State of U.P.

Instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 07 of 2026, Under Section 103(1), 238 (a) and 61(2) (a) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (B.N.S.)-2023, Police Station-Industrial Area, District-Prayagraj.

¶11

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the FIR was lodged by the brother of the deceased making allegation that the applicant along with co-accused persons committed the murder of the deceased on 02.01.2026 and thereafter thrown his body in a drainage. Thereafter on finding the body of the deceased an information was given to the police by the first informant on 03.01.2026 to conduct the post mortem of the body of the deceased. Thereafter on the basis of CCTV footage, the first informant found that the present applicant along with co-accused Satroopa carrying a dead body.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there is no eye witness of the incident and post mortem report shows, cause of death is uncertain. The correct fact is that the deceased wants to establish relationship with the co-accused Satroopa and she denied then just to pressurize her, he committed suicide in her absence. It is further submitted that even the dead body shown to be carrying out by the applicant and coaccused Satroopa could not be identified by the first informant or any other persons as they simply stated that the applicant and co-accused Satroopa appeared to be carrying something which is like a dead body. It is lastly submitted that charge sheet has been filed by the police, therefore, there is no requirement for custodial interrogation. The applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 12.01.2026. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶13

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but

¶14

BAIL No. 16458 of 2026

¶15

2

¶16

could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

¶17

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and taking into account overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 3038 as well as guideline of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari vs State of U.P. reported in 2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding grant of bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the present application is allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant- Vijay Rai @ Nachchu involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:-

¶19

i. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶21

iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶22

iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶24

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

¶25

Verification of mobile number as well as Aadhaar Card of the applicant and sureties should also be conducted by the court concerned.

¶26

It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of downloaded copy of this order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.

¶27

It is directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure early release of the

¶28

BAIL No. 16458 of 2026

¶29

3

¶30

applicant.

¶31

Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through Naini Central Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal within 24 hours in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685 .

¶32

Application, if any, stands disposed of.

¶33

May 14, 2026 A.Kr.

¶34

(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)

¶35

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

Vijay Raj @ Nachchu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Raj @ Nachchu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ratnendra Saxena vs State of Up and Another

Ram Pal and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramesh Nandan and Others vs State of Up and Another

Laldhar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Mohit Kumar vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Tiwari @ Dev Kumar Vs State of U.P.