Allahabad High Court
BAIL/33916/2026 of NANDKISHOR Vs STATE OF U.P. on 22 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33916 of 2026 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J. 1. Heard Sri Ravindra Singh, learned counsel for the accused applicant, Mrs. Rukmaki Ojha, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present bail
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33916 of 2026
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
2
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Sri Ravindra Singh, learned counsel for the accused applicant, Mrs. Rukmaki Ojha, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused- Nandkishor to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 156 of 2026, under Sections 115(2), 109(1), 352, 351(3) of BNS, P.S.- Rajpura, District- Sambhal during the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for accused applicant that the accused applicant has been implicated in FIR dated 23.7.2026 lodged against five persons including the accused applicant by one Mahesh with the allegation that all the accused had assaulted the family members of the informant, namely, Manju and Kailash. It is further contended that during investigation, the name of Kamlesh has also been figured out, whose medical examination has been carried out, although, he has not been shown as an injured either in the FIR or in the prosecution case. It is further contended that omnibus allegations have been levelled against the accused persons that they have assaulted the injured with lathi, danda and iron rod. It is further contended that only Kailash suffered fracture on the frontal bone, rest other, suffered simple injuries. The point of contention between the parties was that injured Kailash was constructing his house when the incident took place. The charge sheet is submited. The accused applicant has no criminal history. He is languishing in jail since Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ravindra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Nandkishor .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)
13.08.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on bail.
4. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have opposed the bail and submits that doctor's statement is clear and explicit that injuries sustained by Kailash are fatal to life. There is specific role assigned to the co-accused Arjun that he has assaulted with iron rod. As such, submits that the bail application should be rejected.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considering the nature and number of injuries on the person of injured and no specific role assigned to the accused applicant, the accused applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
8. The accused/applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned in view of observation made by the Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re [(2024)10SCC 685].
9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and speedy disposal. September 23, 2026 Abhishek Sri. BAIL No. 33916 of 2026 2 (Avnish Saxena,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad