Allowed¶19

Akshay v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Mar 2026BAIL/39294/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail allowed; murder case under Sections 103(1) and 238 of BNS; Case Crime No. 58 of 2025; PS Doghat, District Baghpat; applicant nominated on basis of suspicion; no cogent or direct evidence; no criminal history; in custody since 16.03.2025; cause of death asphyxia due to antemortem throttling; personal bond and two sureties; Allahabad High Court; Krishan Pahal, J.; Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 39294 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Akshay on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and to appear before the trial court as required; breach of conditions to entail cancellation of bail. ¶19

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Akshay, accused in Case Crime No. 58 of 2025 under Sections 103(1) and 238 of BNS (murder), Police Station Doghat, District Baghpat, should be released on bail during the pendency of trial.

¶10

Court's answer

Bail granted: considering the facts and circumstances, nature of offence and severity of punishment, the applicant having been nominated on the basis of suspicion with no cogent or direct evidence against him, the Court found it prima facie a fit case to release the applicant on bail.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

The applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties, on conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required.

¶20

Key takeaways

Breach of any bail condition shall entail cancellation of bail, and the observations made in the order shall not affect the trial on merits.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Krishan Pahal, J.) allowed the bail application of Akshay, accused in Case Crime No. 58 of 2025 under Sections 103(1) and 238 of BNS, Police Station Doghat, District Baghpat, arising out of the alleged murder of the informant's brother on 14.03.2025. The Court observed that the applicant had been nominated on the basis of suspicion alone with no cogent or direct evidence against him, that he had no criminal history, and that he was in custody since 16.03.2025. Bail was granted on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to verification, with conditions that the applicant shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required; breach of any condition to entail cancellation, and the observations not to affect the trial on merits.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39294 of 2025

¶3

Akshay

¶4

	Versus		.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.			.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Alok Ratan Siddha	Kumar, Alok Chaudhary, rth Chaudhary	Tripathi, Desh Pavan Kumar,
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 66

¶6

(Sl. No. 50 out of 116)

¶7

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

¶8

List has been revised.

¶9

Heard Sri Alok Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record.

¶10

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 58 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 238 of BNS, Police Station - Doghat, District - Baghpat, during the pendency of trial.

¶11

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have committed the murder of the brother of the informant on 14.03.2025.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR.

¶13

Learned counsel has also stated that the applicant has simply been made an accused on the basis of suspicion only. The FIR was instituted by the police itself as an afterthought. The FIR itself mentioned the fact that the applicant and the other co-accused persons took the dead body from the road to their house, as such, it is a clear cut case of false implication as there is no cogent or direct evidence against the applicant.The cause of

¶14

BAIL No. 39294 of 2025

¶15

¶16

death of deceased has been found to be asphyxia as a result of antemortem throttling.

¶17

Learned counsel has next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 16.03.2025, having no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.

¶18

Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence, severity of punishment and also considering the fact that the applicant has been nominated on the basis of suspicion and there being no cogent or direct evidence against him, prima facie I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶20

Let the applicant- Akshay , be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required.

¶21

Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits.

¶22

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

¶23

March 19, 2026 Siddhant

¶24

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

Akshay v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akshay 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nishant Joshi and Another Vs State of U.P.

Anil Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Saniya Parveen @ Nisha and Another Vs State of U.P.

Ahmad Hasan Vs State of U.P.

Bhupendra vs State of U.P. and 3 Others