Raj Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:145822

Court No. - 70

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29099 of 2025

Applicant :- Raj Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Kumar 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 record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that similarly situated co-accused namely, Dharmendra Kumar Sharma and Vishwanath Pratap Singh have already been enlarged on bail vide orders dated 19.12.2024 and06.08.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 38538 of 2024 and 27014 of 2025 copy of which orders have been produced before this Court and are taken on record. It is thus contended that the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. 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 applicant is languishing in jail since 24.10.2022.

¶8

Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that in case the applicant is released on bail he will misuse the liberty of bail, however, could not dispute the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant with regard to parity.

¶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 Raj Kumar Yadav be released on bail in Case Crime No. 58 of 2019 under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Farah, District Mathura on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to 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. iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

¶14

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.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

¶16

Order Date :- 23.8.2025 S.Ali

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raj Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar 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