Dhruv Yadav vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:133110

Court No. - 70

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11202 of 2025

Applicant :- Dhruv Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant and two other named accused. The allegation is that the accused, Ajeet Yadav along with his two associates namely Amrendra Kumar Tiwari and the applicant came to the institute and started conducting practical examination of biology subject. Learned counsel submits that the co-accused Ajeet Yadav introduced himself as actual examiner Rajiv Kumar Sharma. Learned counsel further submits that thus specific allegation is against the coaccused Ajeet Yadav, whereas the applicant has been assigned the only role of assisting main accused Ajeet Yadav. Learned counsel further submits that one co-accused, Amrendra Kumar Tiwari, having same set of allegation as has been made against the applicant has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 05.08.2025 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11087 of 2025, and as the case of applicant is not on the worse footing than that of the aforesaid co-accused, therefore, applicant may also be enlarged on bail. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 06.02.2025, with no criminal history.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but he could not dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant- Dhruv Yadav, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 15 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 112(2) of B.N.S., Police Station- Kotwali, District- Varanasi, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶11

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶12

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶13

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶14

iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

¶15

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

¶16

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law.

¶17

Order Date :- 6.8.2025 Mustaqeem.

¶18

Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dhruv Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhruv Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sudhir @ Totala vs State of U.P.

Parmatma Prasad vs State of U.P. and Another

Asif vs State of U.P.

Usman vs State of U.P.

Abhishek @ Chotu vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar vs State of U.P.