Allowed

Arvind Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2022BAIL/17519/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Arvind Yadav in a case under Sections 302 and 120-B IPC. The court held that the applicant was falsely implicated, the FIR arose from a family dispute, and evidence was coerced. Bail was granted with specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail application allowed; applicant released on personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering with evidence and ensuring appearance in court.

Arvind Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17519 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Arvind Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar,Kalp Dev Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashok Kumar Singh Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 217 of 2021 at Police Station Jangipur, District Ghazipur under Sections 302, 120-B IPC. The applicant is in jail since 02.02.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Ghazipur, on 14.03.2022.

¶7

Sri Pradeep Kumar and Sri Kalp Dev Mishra, learned counsels for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the FIR arises out of a family dispute. The deceased is the brother in law of the applicant. On previous occasions the family disputes were settled amicably. The FIR has been lodged on the basis of suspicion and conjectures. Suspicion however is no substitute for evidence. The applicant has not been identified as the principal offender who had inflicted the fatal injury on the deceased. The other implicatory evidence is only the confessional statement made by the applicant before the police authorities. The said statement was extracted by coercion and made under duress. There is no direct

¶8

evidence against the applicant. The chain of circumstantial evidence is not complete.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has explained the criminal history of the applicant of one case. The applicant has never misused the liberty of bail granted to him in the said case. The said case does not depict any heinous crime and has no bearing on this bail application. The applicant is not a flight risk.

¶10

Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA for the State and Sri Shailendra, learned counsel for the informant could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.

¶11

I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant- Arvind Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶16

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶19

Order Date :- 4.7.2022 Pravin

¶20

Digitally signed by PRAVIN VERMA Date: 2022.07.05 17:33:55 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arvind Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Amit Vs State of U.P.

Rahmat Ali Vs State of U.P.

Seema Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Vs State of U.P. Thr Pri. Sec. Home Govt. of U.P.

Moh. Shafiq Vs State of U.P.