Allowed

Virendra Shah v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Apr 2025BAIL/5244/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Sections 3(5)/179, 180 BNS for an offence at Police Station Pataurkha, Mathura. Counsel argued the applicant was falsely implicated and no forged currency recovered. The court granted regular bail on personal bond with two sureties, imposing conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties of same amount, subject to stated conditions

Virendra Shah vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:58768

¶2

Court No. - 86

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5244 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Virendra Shah Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

orZeku nkf.Md izdh.kZ tekur izkFkZuk i=] vkosnd ohjsUnz 'kkg dh vksj ls eq0v0la0 24 lu 2025] vUrxZr /kkjk 3(5)/179, 180 B.N.S., Fkkuk ijrkiqj] ftyk esjB esa tekur ij eqDr djus gsrq izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA

¶7

vkosnd ds fo}ku vf/koDrk ,oa fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk dks lquk rFkk i=koyh dk ifj’khyu fd;kA

¶8

vkosnd ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dk dFku gS fd vkosnd dks bl izdj.k esa xyr ,oa QthZ rjhds ls >wBk QWlk;k x;k gS] vkosnd izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa ukfer vfHk;qDr ugha gS] mldk uke iqfyl }kjk jaft’ku c<+k;k x;k gS] vkosnd ds ikl ls QthZ uksVksa dh dksbZ cjkenxh ugha gq;h gS] tks Hkh cjkenxh fn[kk;h x;h gS og QthZ vf/kjksfir dh x;h gS] cjken uksVksa dh dksbZ Qksjsafld tkWp ugha djk;h x;h gS] vkosnd dk dksbZ iwoZ vkijkf/kd bfrgkl ugha gS] vkosnd funksZ"k gS rFkk og bl izdj.k esa 8&1&2025 ls dkjkxkj es a fu:) gS] blfy, vkosnd dks tekur ij NksM+ fn;k tk;A

¶9

fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk us vkosnd ds fo}ku vf/koDrk ds rdksZ dk izcy fojks/k djrs gq, rdZ izLrqr fd;k fd vkosnd }kjk dkfjr vijk/k laKs; ,oa xEHkhj izd`fr dk gS] blfy, vkosnd dks tekur ij u NksM+k tk;A

¶10

vkosnd ds fo}ku vf/koDrk ds rdksZ ds ifjizs{; esa i=koyh ij miyC/k lkjoku rF;ksa ,oa ifjfLFkfr;ksa dk lexz :i ls voyksdu djus ds ckn] lcwrksa dh izd`fr vkSj fdlh Hkh Bksl fojks/kkRed lkexzh dh vuqifLFkfr ,oa miyC/k lkexzh ls NsM+NkM+ dh laHkkouk u gksus ds rF; dks ns[krs gq, esjh jk; esa vkosnd dks tekur ij eqDr djus dk mi;qDr vk/kkj gSA

¶11

vr% okn ds xq.k nks"k ij fcuk dksbZ fVIi.kh fd, gq, vkosnd dks mijksDr of.kZr vijk/k esa lacaf/kr U;k;ky; dh lUrqf"V ij O;fDrxr ca/k&i= ,oa mlh /kujkf’k ds nks izfrHkw izLrqr djus ij fuEufyf[kr 'krksZ ds lkFk tekur ij NksM+ fn;k tk;A

¶12

1& vkosnd foospuk ;k ijh{k.k ds nkSjku vfHk;kstu lk{;ksa ds lkFk NsM + NkM+ ugha djsxkA

¶13

2& vkosnd vfHk;kstu lkf{k;ksa o ihfM+r@f’kdk;rdrkZ dks Mjk;sxk@/kedk;sxk ughaA

¶14

3& vkosnd U;k;ky; ds vkns’kksa dk ikyu djsxk] og ijh{k.k ds nkSjku fcuk dksbZ vuko’;d LFkxu fy, fu;r frfFk ij U;k;ky; esa mifLFkr gksxk rFkk ijh{k.k esa bZekunkjh ls lg;ksx djsxkA 4& vkosnd tekur ij fjgk gksus ds ckn tekur dh Lora=rk dk nq:i;ksx ugha djsxk vkSj

¶15

fdlh Hkh vijkf/kd xfrfof/k esa fyIr ugha gksxk u dksbZ vijkf/kd d`R; djsxkA

¶16

5& vkosnd izR;{k ;k vizR;{k :i ls ekeys ds rF;ksa ls ifjfpr fdlh Hkh O;fDr ;k iqfyl vf/kdkfj;ksa dks dksbZ izyksHku ;k /kedh ugha nsxk u gh muls dksbZ ok;nk djsxk] ftlds dkj.k mUgsa U;k;ky; esa rF;ksa dks mtkxj djus ls fojr jguk iM+sA

¶17

mijksDr 'krksZ esa ls fdlh ds mYya?ku ds ekeys esa] ijh{k.k U;k;ky; vkosnd dh tekur fu;ekuqlkj jn~n djus dks Lora= gSA

¶18

fn0 % 21&4&2025 ds0lh0flag

¶19

2 of 2

¶20

Digitally signed by :- KAILASH CHANDRA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Virendra Shah v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Shah v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Prasad Gupta vs State of U.P.

Rizwan Ansari vs Central Narcotic Bureau

Ravindra Pal vs State of U.P.

Raju vs State of U.P. and Another

Irfan vs State of U.P.

Rohit Diwakar vs State of U.P.