IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Ajay Bhanot, J.
Asha – Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.-13193 of 2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.- 19170 of 2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 16313 of 2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 12136 of 2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 18831 of 2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.- 17134 of 2025 , Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 13551 of 2025 , Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 14246 of 2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 14453 of 2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.- 9600 of 2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.- 26735 of 2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.- 11558 of 2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.- 14785 of 2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.- 6702 of 2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.- 11032 of 2025 , Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.- 15795 of 2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 11724 of 2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.- 8473 of 2025
Decided On : 14-10-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. bail rights and grounds for defense. (Para 2 , 3 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. court observations & conditions about bail. (Para 4 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. constitutional rights affecting bail decisions. (Para 10 , 11 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 4. judicial discretion and bail considerations. (Para 12 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. final conclusions on bail applications. (Para 101 , 103 , 105) |
JUDGMENT :
AJAY BHANOT, J.
1. The judgment is being structured in the following conceptual framework to facilitate the discussion:
| I | Introduction | ||||||||||
| II | Issue arising for consideration | ||||||||||
| III | Submissions of learned counsels for the parties | ||||||||||
| IV | Bail: Grounds for grant/denial of bail | ||||||||||
| V | Constitutional law and bails | ||||||||||
| VI | Fair trial and Defence of an accused | ||||||||||
| VII | Defence of an accused & Bail:
| ||||||||||
| VIII | Conclusions: Parameters for grant of bail to prepare and conduct defence | ||||||||||
| IX | Post Script:
| ||||||||||
| X | Order on bail application |
I. Introduction:
2. In this bail application and all companion bail applications prosecution evidence is near conclusion or has closed. Proceedings under Section 313 Cr.P.C. will be shortly set in motion, and thereafter defence evidence will be received. These are second bail applications. In all bail applications the primary ground for grant of bail is to conduct effective defence of the case.
II. Issue arising for consideration:
3. The issue that has arisen for consideration in this bail application and the connected bail applications is whether gathering of defence evidence, preparation of defence strategy and effectively prosecuting the defence case in a trial can be a ground for granting bail? If the answer is in the affirmative, what are the parameters on which the bail can be granted for framing a defence strategy, collecting defence evidence and conduct of defence and at what stage?
4. Heard Shri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Sadrul Islam Jafri, learned counsel, Shri Dharmendra Singhal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Shivendra Singhal, learned counsel, Shri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel, Shri Sheshadri Trivedi, learned counsel, Shri Vikrant Rana, learned counsel, Shri Madhu Ranjan Pandey, learned counsel, Shri Irshad Ahmad, learned counsel, Shri Aishwarya Pratap Singh, learned counsel assisted by Shri Amiruddin Siddique, learned counsel, Shri Tripurari Pal, learned counsel, Shri M.P. Srivastava, learned counsel, Shri Shailesh Pandey, learned counsel, Shri Mohit Kumar Jaiswal, learned counsel, Shri Shashi Kumar Mishra, learned counsel, Shri Nasiruzzaman, learned counsel, Shri Gireesh Chandra Sharma, learned counsel, Shri Yadvendra Dwivedi, learned counsel, Shri Rahul Saxena, learned counsel, Shri Bharat Singh, learned counsel, Shri Sandeep Pandey, learned counsel, Shri Narendra Singh, learned counsel, Shri Azhar Hussain, learned counsel, Shri Jitendra Singh, learned counsel, Shri Saket Jaiswal, learned counsel and Shri Samrat Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the applicants.
Shri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant (as Hon’ble Rajiv Lochan Shukla, J. then was) has since been elevated to the Bench of this Court.
4.1. Shri Ashok Mehta, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned A.G.A.-I and Shri Chandan Agrawal, learned A.G.A.-I for the State.
III. Submissions of learned counsels for the parties:
5. The hearings on the common legal issue arising in all the companion bail applications happened on various dates. Learned counsels for the applicants in all matters have made the following submissions on the common legal issue that has arisen for consideration:
I. The right of bail is sourced to statute, however, it has deep roots in Ar
Rajesh Ranjan Yadav alias Pappu Yadav v. CBI through its Director
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan alias Pappu Yadav and another
Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh and others
Brijmani Devi v. Pappu Kumar and another
Ishwarji Nagaji Mali v. State of Gujarat and another
State of U.P. v. Amarmani Tripathi
Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab
Nimmagadda Prasad v. Central Bureau of Investigation
Gurcharan Singh and others v. State (Delhi Admn.)
Lt. Col. Prasad Shrikant Purohit v. State of Maharashtra
P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement
Anil Kumar Yadav v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another
Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee and another
Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P.
Rajasthan v. Balchand alias Baliay
Mohd. Muslim alias Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Sheikh Javed Iqbal @ Ashfaq Ansari @ Javed Ansari Vs State of U.P.
Nikesh Tarachand Shah Vs Union of India and another
Vaman Narain Ghiya v. State of Rajasthan
Prem Prakash v. Union of India through the Directorate of Enforcement
Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another
Hussainara Khatoon and others Vs Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya and others v. State of Gujarat and another
Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh and another v. State of Gujarat and others
J. Jayalalithaa and others v. State of Karnataka and others
Rattiram and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh through Inspector of Police
State of Gujarat v. Kishanbhai and others
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.