Yashwant vs State of U.P.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36766 of 2025

Yashwant

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Karunesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 70

¶8

HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J.

¶9

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

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vijendra Kumar, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶11

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant Yashwant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.134 of 1994, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Basti.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused-applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in this case. Applicant is languishing in jail since 11.9.2025. It is submitted that as per FIR applicant has taken admission in A.P.N. Degree College on the basis of forged documents. It is further submitted that the FIR was registered in the year 1994 and during the course of proceeding applicant was arrested but no any incriminating document was said to be recovered from the possession of applicant in this case. It is argued that charge against the applicant has already been framed on 7.11.2025 and statement of PW-1 has also been recorded. It is further argued that coaccused Rajesh Kumar Singh has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 31.10.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 482 BNSS No.8086 of 2025. It is next argued that applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit. Submission is that the conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in

¶13

BAIL No. 36766 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶16

Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pretrial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. It is further submitted that, in case the applicant is released on bail, he may again indulge in similar activities and misuse the liberty of bail.

¶17

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering paragraph no.53 of Apex Court in case of Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024 (SC) LawSuit 677 , dictum of Apex Court in Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb (2021) 3 SCC 713 & Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. (2022) 10 SCC 51 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that:-

¶18

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶19

(ii) 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.

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the court concerned.

¶21

(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 of accused personally to explain circumstances appearing in the evidence against him.

¶22

(v) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him strictly, in accordance with law.

¶23