Aman Yadav vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:29540

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12056 of 2024 Applicant :- Aman Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Piyush Asthana,Ajeet Kumar Singh,Amit Kumar Singh,Virijendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anurudh Kumar Singh,Nand Kishore Patel

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Amit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Smt. Shikha Sinha, learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Nand Kishore Patel, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the records.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.208 of 2024 under Sections 147, 302, 120-B I.P.C. registered at Police Station- Madiyaon, District- Lucknow.

¶7

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 05.04.2024 at about 07:54 hours against- (i) Vayu (ii) Satyam Sahni (iii) Avinash Tiwari (iv) Vishal Pandey (v) Piyush Awasthi and other unnamed persons, stating that Vayu had come to the informant's house at about 11:30 hours on 04.04.2024 and taken away her son aged 19 years to celebrate his birthday. When he did not come back till late hours, they started making enquiries and they came to know that her son was taken to Mama Colony, Faizullaganj where Avinash Tiwari, Vishal Pandey and Piyush Awasthi and some other persons consumed liquor and thereafter, they entered into an altercation in which the informant's son suffered serious injuries. Shivam Sahni and Anshul Mishra reached there and they took the informant's injured son to Trauma Centre, KGMU, Lucknow where he died during treatment. The informant stated that

¶8

Satyam Sahni had also come with Vayu for calling her son.

¶9

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history.

¶10

The postmortem examination report mentions seven injuries suffered by the deceased and the cause of death has been opined to be coma as a result of antemortem head injury.

¶11

A flat piece of wood has been recovered from an open plot of land on the pointing out of co-accused Avinash Tiwari. An eye witness Sujal Rawat stated that it was Vayu's birthday on the date of the incident, he has called Sujal, Avanish Sharma (the deceased) and Satyam Sahni. They consumed liquor at Kapoorthala at about 09:00 PM and thereafter went to the house of Satyam Sahni. They were sitting at an open piece of land after 12:30 in the night. Avinash Tiwari, Piyush Awasthi, Vishal Pandey, Aditya Yadav, Aman Yadav (the applicant) and Anand Yadav came there and at the exhortation of Avinash Tiwari, all those persons attacked them with sticks and flat pieces of woods. Avnish fell down and the other persons ran away.

¶12

A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant annexing therewith the statements of some other witnesses which have not been annexed with the counter affidavit.

¶13

In the statement of the eye-witness Sujal Rawat, he merely stated that while he was sitting with Vayu Singh, Avanish Sharma, Satyam Sahni were sitting in an open land near Apna Lawn, six persons, including the applicant, had come there and at the exhortation of Avanish Tiwari, all those persons started beating all the persons present there due to which Avanish fell

¶14

down and all the other persons ran away and when they came back, Avanish was lying unconscious and Shivam Sahni took him to Trauma Centre. Avanish Sharma was friend of Vayu. Therefore, Avinash Tiwari kept grudge against him due to which Avinash Tiwari and his companions killed Avanish Sharma.

¶15

Shivam Sahni gave a similar statement and he further stated that he had told about the incident to the mother of Avinash Sharma (the informant).

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the FIR was lodged against five named persons, not including the applicant, stating that the deceased was taken away from his home at about 11:30 PM on 04.04.2024 by Vayu and Satyam Sahni; Vayu and Satyam Sahni have turned approvers and the applicant has been implicated on the basis of their statements. Co-accused Shivam Sahni has stated that the applicant was involved in beating the deceased and he further stated that he had told it to the informant yet the informant has not implicated the applicant in the FIR.

¶17

Learned A.G.A. the learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application. The learned AGA has submitted that the allegations have been established during investigation and a charge-sheet has been submitted on 25.06.2024.

¶18

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the eye-witnesses claim that they had told about the incident to the informant yet, the applicant is not named in the FIR; even as per the statement of eye-witnesses, they merely stated that at the exhortation of co-accused Avinash Tiwari, all the persons present there were

¶19

beaten up but it appears that besides the deceased, no person had suffered injuries in the incident; as per the incident, the accused persons were carrying sticks and wood planks and no weapon was used in the offence; that the applicant is a young boy aged 18 years having no criminal history, he is languishing in jail since 05.04.2024 and the investigation already stands concluded, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid case.

¶20

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶21

Let the applicant- Aman Yadav be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶22

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court, unless his/her appearance exempted by the trial Court.

¶23

[Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]

¶24

Order Date :- 19.5.2025 -Amit K-

¶25

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Aman Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aman 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

Deepu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Rahul Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Laxmi Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Salman @ Riyaj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Suraj Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mukesh Jaiswal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another