Bail Plea Rejected in Attempted Murder Case.
Court Satisfied with Strong Arguments by Prosecution and Victim’s Counsel; Young Lawyers Rejoice.
Varanasi In a serious criminal matter from Varanasi district, the Hon’ble Sessions Judge, Varanasi rejected the bail application of the accused Sunil Yadav alias Sopadu Yadav, after considering the facts of the case, medical evidence, and settled legal precedents. The case pertains to Police Station Chitaipur, Varanasi, where the accused is alleged to have launched a life-threatening knife attack following verbal abuse in a public place on 24 August 2025. The victim, Amit Keshari, sustained grievous injuries and was admitted to the BHU Trauma Centre for treatment. CCTV footage and medical reports, including CECT Thorax, confirmed serious injuries such as left hemothorax and lung contusion, clearly establishing the severity of the assault. Strong Opposition by the Prosecution Opposing the bail plea, Munib Singh Chauhan, D.G.C. (Criminal), submitted before the Court that the assault was committed with a sharp-edged weapon and was grave, premeditated, and life-threatening in nature. He further emphasized that the involvement of the accused is clearly established through CCTV footage, medical evidence, and the case diary. Effective Arguments by the Victim’s Side Appearing on behalf of the complainant/victim, Senior Advocate Shashank Shekhar Tripathi and Senior Advocate Ashutosh Shukla advanced forceful and well-reasoned arguments, drawing the Court’s attention to the clear intention to kill behind the attack, which could have resulted in the victim’s death. They also contended that if the accused were released on bail, there was a serious likelihood of repeat offences and intimidation or influence over prosecution witnesses. Reference to Supreme Court Precedents During the course of arguments, reliance was placed on several landmark judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, including Dilip Singh v. State, Kishore Samrite v. State, and State of U.P. v. Amarmani Tripathi, which categorically lay down that in heinous and serious offences, bail is not a matter of routine or entitlement. Court’s Order and Reaction of the Legal Fraternity After carefully evaluating all facts, circumstances, evidence, and the gravity of the offence, the Court rejected the bail application of the accused by order dated 19 January 2026.
Notably, the victim in this case is the brother-in-law of young advocate Pawan Keshari. As soon as the order rejecting bail was pronounced, a wave of satisfaction and happiness swept through the legal fraternity, particularly among young lawyers. They described the order as a victory of justice and stated that such decisions further strengthen public faith in the judiciary.