Allowed

Yamin @ Amin @ Kalla v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2025BAIL/41335/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed. The court released the applicant on bail citing Article 21 and Supreme Court precedents regarding lengthy trials, subject to conditions including personal bond, heavy sureties, and strict attendance.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing personal bond and two heavy sureties, subject to conditions of attendance and non-tampering.

Yamin @ Amin @ Kalla vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41335 of 2025

Yamin @ Amin @ Kalla

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ramesh Chandra Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Court No. - 70

¶7

HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J.

¶8

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

¶9

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant Yamin @ Amin @ Kalla seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.337 of 2024, under Sections 305, 331(4), 317(2) B.N.S., Police Station Malpura, District Agra.

¶10

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 7.12.2024. It is submitted that initially the FIR was registered as unknown with the allegation that some unknown person has stolen some ornaments, cash from the house of the informant and during the course of investigation name of applicant was surfaced on the false information given to the I.O. It is further submitted that Rs.25,600/- was said to be recovered from the possession of applicant but neither any independent and reliable witness was present at the time of preparation of recovery memo and arrest of applicant nor any incriminating thing like ornament was recovered from the possession of applicant. It is argued that applicant has criminal history of 13 cases which have been explained in para 15 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application as well as in supplementary affidavit. It is lastly submitted that since charge-sheet has already been submitted, therefore, there is no reasonable possibility of intimidating or pressurizing the prosecution witnesses. Submission is that the conclusion of trial will take sufficiently

¶11

BAIL No. 41335 of 2025

¶12

¶13

long and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶14

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.

¶15

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 heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that:-

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

BAIL No. 41335 of 2025

¶22

¶23