Virendra Yadav @ Bachha Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22492

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2886 of 2025

Applicant :- Virendra Yadav @ Bachha Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Srivastava,Avinash Srivastava

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶7

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶8

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶9

Heard Ms. Pragya Bhushan holding brief for Shri Ashok Kumar Srivasvastav, learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA appearing on behalf of State and perused on record.

¶10

This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.0180 of 2024 under Section 2/3 Gangsters and AntiSocial Activities (Prevention) Act, P.S. Mandhata, District Pratapgarh.

¶11

It is submitted that as per gang chart, the applicant has been shown involved in two cases bearing Case Crime No. 103 of 2024 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 504, 506, 427 and 120B IPC and case Crime No. 104 of 2024, under Section 307 IPC & 3/25 Arms Act and in both the cases the applicant has been enlarged on bail by the District and Sessions Court, vide order dated 11.12.2024 passed in Bail Application No. 3585 of 2024 and order dated 13.11.2024 passed in Bail Application No. 2321 of 2024, respectively.

¶12

It is submitted that the applicant is shown involved in 16 other cases bearing Case Crime No. 49 of 2016, under Sections 41, 411, 413, 414, 420 IPC and 25 Arms Act, Case Crime No. 98 of 2016 under Sections 379, 411 IPC, Case Crime No. 296 of 2016, under Sections 41, 411, 413, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Case Crime No. 108 of 2018, under Sections 3/25 Arms Act, Case Crime No. 1130 of 2020, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, Case Crime No. 1272 of 2020, under Sections 411, 419, 420 IPC, Case Crime No. 10 of 2021, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, Case Crime No. 12 of 2021, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, Case Crime No. 15 of 2021, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, Case

¶13

Crime No. 18 of 2021, under Sections 411, 413, 419, 420 IPC, Case Crime No. 67 of 2021, under Sections 411, 413, 414, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Case Crime No. 401 of 2021, under Sections 452, 394, 397, 34 IPC and 3/25 Arms Act, Case Crime No. 109 of 2023, under Sections 110G, Case Crime No. 271 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 504, 506, 307 IPC, Case Crime No. 152 of 2021, under Sections 395, 412 IPC and Case Crime No. 204 of 2021, under Sections 394, 342, 411 IPC. Out of 16 cases in 15 cases the applicant has been released on bail by the competent criminal courts and one Case Crime No. 109 of 2023 has been ended. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 01.12.2024.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer for bail application but does not dispute the aforesaid facts that applicant has already been enlarged on bail in all the said cases.

¶15

Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation , reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :-

¶16

" 21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty."

¶17

"27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."

¶18

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, and subject to further evidence being led in trial, it appears that applicant has already been enlarged on bail in all the cases filed against him as averred in the affidavit filed in support of application and therefore conditions indicated in Section 19(4) U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 stand complied with at this stage, therefore the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this

¶19

case.

¶20

Accordingly bail application is allowed.

¶21

Let applicant- Virendra Yadav @ Bachha Yadav involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶22

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶23

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶25

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶26

Order Date :- 21.4.2025 Muk

¶27

Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Virendra Yadav @ Bachha Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Yadav @ Bachha Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Anuj Saroj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Taj Mohammad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Saddam @ Mohd. Saddam Qureshi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Shivkant Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Ravindra Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Dr. Aftab Iqbal Beg vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Medical Health Lko. and 4 Others