Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Kapil Kumar vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 25 February, 2026
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2026
(arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 20363/2025)
KAPIL KUMAR APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & RESPONDENT(S)
ANR.
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The complainant in Case Crime/First
Information Report (FIR) No. 612/2024
dated 12.07.2024 registered with Police
Station – Nandgram, District – Ghaziabad,
Uttar Pradesh, for the offences punishable
under Sections 109(1), 103(1), 3(5) and
193(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of the Arms
Act, 1959, is before this Court, aggrieved
by the grant of bail to one of the accused
Signature Not Verified
therein, viz., Kuldeep, respondent No. 2
Digitally signed by
Deepak Guglani
Date: 2026.02.25
17:28:32 IST
Reason:
Crl.A. @ SLP(Crl.) No. 20363/2025 1
herein, by the High Court of Judicature at
Allahabad, vide order dated 17.10.2025
passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application
No. 16265/2025.
While issuing notice on 09.12.2025,
this Court took note of the fact that
respondent No. 2, Kuldeep, had not been
released from prison pursuant to the
impugned order and directed that the same
should not be given effect to till the
next hearing.
Pleadings having been completed, we
have heard the learned counsel for the
appellant, the learned counsel for the
State of Uttar Pradesh and the learned
senior counsel for respondent No. 2,
Kuldeep.
The impugned order does not reflect
adequate consideration of all the relevant
aspects of the case. The learned Judge
merely made certain observations in
paragraph 21 and the said observations
form the foundation for the grant of
Crl.A. @ SLP(Crl.) No. 20363/2025 2
relief to the accused-respondent No. 2,
Kuldeep. Para 21 reads thus: –
“21.Considering the facts and
circumstances of the case,
submissions made by learned
counsel for the parties, delay in
lodging the FIR and also
considering the fact that the
applicant is not named in the FIR
and his name has come up
subsequently in the statement of
the informant recorded u/s 180
BNSS, prima facie I find it a fit
case to release the applicant on
bail. The bail application is
allowed.”We find from the material placed on
record that there were three eye-
witnesses, including the appellant, Kapil
Kumar. All three of them specifically
spoke of the role played by respondent No.
2, Kuldeep, in the commission of the
offence, whereby the appellant’s cousin,
Vikas Chaudhary, was shot dead. We may
also note that respondent No. 2, Kuldeep,
has seven past criminal antecedents,
including one under Section 307 of theCrl.A. @ SLP(Crl.) No. 20363/2025 3
Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Given the aforestated circumstances,
we are of the opinion that respondent No.
2, Kuldeep, was not entitled to grant of
bail at this stage, when the trial is
still in process and crucial witnesses are
yet to be examined.
The appeal is, accordingly, allowed,
setting aside the impugned order dated
17.10.2025 passed by the High Court of
Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Misc.
Bail Application No. 16265/2025.
The trial Court shall, however,
expedite the trial and the prosecution
shall ensure that examination of the eye-
witnesses is undertaken on priority basis.
Pending application(s), if any, shall
stand disposed of.
………………….J.
(SANJAY KUMAR)
………………….J.
(K. VINOD CHANDRAN)
NEW DELHI;
FEBRUARY 25, 2026.
Crl.A. @ SLP(Crl.) No. 20363/2025 4
ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.12 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.
20363/2025
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order
dated 17-10-2025 in CRMBA No. 16265/2025 passed by
the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad]
KAPIL KUMAR Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. Respondent(s)
(IA No. 313698/2025 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF
THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 313699/2025 –
EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No. 313702/2025
– PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..))
Date : 25-02-2026 This matter was called on for
hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. VINOD CHANDRANFor Petitioner(s) :
Mr. Nagendra Kasana, AOR
Mr. Sachin Bhati, Adv.
Ms. Neeta Kasana, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :
Dr. Vijendra Singh, AOR
Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Amit Kumar Thakur, Adv.
5
Mr. Nitish Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Shashank Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Varun Singh, Adv.
Ms. Arshi, Adv.
Mr. Chirag Joshi, Adv.
Mr. Niteen Kumar Sinha, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E RLeave granted.
The appeal is allowed, setting aside the
impugned order dated 17.10.2025 passed by the High
Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Misc.
Bail Application No. 16265/2025, in terms of the
signed order.
The trial Court shall, however, expedite the
trial and the prosecution shall ensure that
examination of the eye-witnesses is undertaken on
priority basis.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand
disposed of.
(DEEPAK GUGLANI) (PREETI SAXENA)
AR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)6
