Umesh Pal Murder Case | Supreme Court Issues Notice On Bail Plea Of Atiq Ahmed's Driver

The Supreme Court today issued notice on a bail plea filed by Kaish Ahmad, an accused in the February 2023 murder of advocate Umesh Pal and two police personnel in Prayagraj.

A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan issued notice returnabe on May 25, 2025 against Ahmad's plea challenging the Allahabad High Court order dated November 07, 2025 refusing him bail.

The petitioner has stated that he was working as a driver for Shaista Parveen, the wife of deceased gangster and co-accused Atiq Ahmad, and has been falsely implicated only because of his employment.

The case arises from an FIR lodged by Jaya Pal, wife of Umesh Pal, alleging that on February 24, 2023, between around 4:45 pm and 5:00 pm, assailants armed with firearms and explosives attacked Umesh Pal and his security guards near their residence. Umesh Pal and guard Sandeep Nishad died, while another guard Raghavendra Singh later died during treatment. Umesh Pal was a crucial witness against Atiq Ahmed in the 2005 murder case of BSP MLA Raju Pal.

The FIR named Atiq Ahmad, his brother Ashraf, his wife Shaista Parveen, and other associates. Kaish Ahmad's name did not appear in the FIR.

According to the petitioner, his name surfaced only during investigation based on the statement of one Mukesh Patel recorded under Section 161 CrPC, who claimed that about 14 to 15 days before the incident, he overheard a conversation at the residence of Atiq Ahmad where a plan to kill Umesh Pal was discussed.

“It is also pertinent to mention herein that presence of Petitioner is alleged during planning for the commission of crime, there is no mention about any contribution, of any kind, of the Petitioner in such planning”, the plea adds.

The petition further highlights that Pal's wife, who claimed to have seen everyone involved in the incident through CCTV footage, did not mention his name in the FIR.

The petitioner has argued that the case against him rests on statements recorded in police custody, which are not reliable, and that even prosecution witnesses indicate that he was not present at the scene of the crime.

Background

Kaish Ahmad was arrested on March 21, 2023 from near Subedarganj railway station along with other accused. The police claim recovery of cash and weapons on the basis of disclosures made by the accused, which the petitioner has disputed.

The charge sheet dated June 17, 2023 invokes offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 506, 34 and 120-B IPC along with provisions of the Explosive Substances Act, the Criminal Law Amendment Act and the SC/ST Act.

While rejecting bail, the High Court held that statements indicated that Ahmad was present in meetings where the plan to eliminate Umesh Pal was discussed and that he was aware of the conspiracy.

The High Court also relied on recovery of a large amount of cash, mobile phone and weapons allegedly made on the pointing out of the accused. It held that these materials, at the stage of bail, constituted sufficient prima facie evidence linking Ahmad to the conspiracy.

The Court further noted that the case involved a premeditated triple murder carried out in broad daylight using firearms and explosives and that the charges were punishable with death or life imprisonment. It held that parameters for grant of bail in such offences are stringent and the material on record showed Ahmad's involvement in the conspiracy.

It also observed that at the stage of bail, the admissibility of evidence is not to be examined in detail and statements under Section 161 CrPC can be considered to assess whether a prima facie case exists.

On this basis, the High Court held that there were no sufficient grounds to release the accused on bail and rejected the appeal.

Senior Advs Siddharth Dave, Nikhil Goel, along with Rohit Amit Sthalekar AOR, appeared for the Petitioner.

Case no. – Diary No. - 17863/2026

Case Title – Kaish Ahmad v. State of U.P.