Virendra Singh Yadav @ Veerey Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:26782

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 505 of 2025

Applicant :- Virendra Singh Yadav @ Veerey Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Sinha,Ram Chandra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashutosh Bajpai,Priyam Kumar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Arun Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Alok Kumar Tiwari, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, as well as Ashutosh Bajpai, learned counsel for the informant and perused the records.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.0486 of 2024, under Sections 61(2)Ka, 103(1) and 3(5) B.N.S., registered at Police Station Kotwali Shahar, District Hardoi.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 31.07.2024 against three unnamed persons, stating two unknown persons came to the house of the informant's elder brother at about 7.30 p.m. on 30.07.2024 and asked his clerk to call the advocate. Since the informant's elders brother went to his chamber, one of the persons shot at him and both of them wen out and ran away on a motorcycle with a third person, who was standing outside.

¶9

During investigation, it came to light that six persons has purchased a house which was in possession of the deceased as a tenant. They were making efforts for getting the premises vacated and civil litigation in this regard is pending.

¶10

It was concluded that the owner of the house had got the tenant eliminated in an attempt to get the possession of the house.

¶11

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case.

¶12

In para-45 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application applicant's involvement in 31 other criminal cases has been disclosed. The applicant has been enlarged on bail in eight cases , two cases have been withdrawn by the Government, in seven cases the investigating officer did not submit a charge-sheet against the applicant, in one case the applicant has been acquitted after trial, six cases stand closed upon expiry of the stipulated period, proceedings of one case have been quashed by this Court, and the applicant is not an accused in one case. The applicant has stated that he has no knowledge about three other cases.

¶13

The State has filed a counter affidavit. Reply to the averments made in para-45 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application has been given in para-47 of the counter affidavit wherein merely this much has been stated that the averments made in para-45 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application show the criminal nature of the applicant, the applicant has a criminal history, he has a criminal bent of mind. The averments made in para-45 of the affidavit filed in support of the application that numerous cases have wrongly been shown as the criminal history of the applicant and the applicant is not involved in those cases and he has no knowledge of those cases, have not been specifically replied in para-47 of the counter affidavit.

¶14

The Court comes across such situation in numerous cases

¶15

where the criminal history of the applicant is mentioned in the counter affidavit filed by the State in a cursory manner. Full particulars of the cases are not mentioned. The Court has observed previously also and had requested the learned Additional Advocate General that suitable mechanism should be developed by the State so that while providing instructions to the learned AGA, complete particulars of the other criminal cases in which the applicant is involved should be provided, and the stage of the cases should be indicated therein. It should specifically be informed to the learned AGA as to whether the applicant has been served with the summons/warrants of the cases or whether any proceedings sunder Section 82-83 B.N.S. has been initiated. The cursory manner of pointing out criminal history of the accused persons creates hindrance in expeditious dispensation of justice to litigants and it cannot be appreciated. The State is cautioned to be more careful in future while pointing out criminal history of accused persons.

¶16

In the counter affidavit it has been stated that the applicant was one of the co-purchasers of the property which was in possession of the deceased as a tenant and he had the motive for commission of the offence. It is alleged that the applicant had conspired for elimination of the tenant of the property in an attempt to get its possession. However, besides a suspicion of the applicant's involvement in hatching a conspiracy for elimination of the deceased, no other material has been brought on record.

¶17

A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant annexing therewith statements of five prosecution witnesses recorded by the trial Court. Besides stating facts, which may indicate motive of the applicant for commission of the offence, no other fact has come to light in any of the

¶18

statements regarding involvement of the applicant in commission of the offence.

¶19

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and without making any observation which may affect the outcome of the trial, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail.

¶20

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶21

Let the applicant - Virendra Singh Yadav @ Veerey Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid 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;

¶23

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶24

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court.

¶25

[Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]

¶26

Order Date :- 7.5.2025

¶27

MVS/-

¶28

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Virendra Singh Yadav @ Veerey Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Singh Yadav @ Veerey Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Vivek Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Suhail Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Sundar Lal Lodhi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Sonu @ Abhay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others