Allowed

Gulab Singh @ Yeshraj Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Allahabad HC17 Sept 2025BAIL/5445/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under multiple BNS sections arising from Case Crime No.256 of 2024. Court granted bail on the ground of parity with co-accused who had already been released on bail, imposing standard conditions including no tampering with evidence and attendance requirements.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two reliable sureties, with conditions including no tampering with evidence, no witness intimidation, and trial attendance.

Gulab Singh @ Yeshraj Singh Vs State of U.P… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5445 of 2025

¶3

Gulab Singh @ Yeshraj Singh

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Amit Kumar Singh

¶7

Court No. - 12

¶8

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶10

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.256 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 103(1), 351(2), 352, 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Bazar Shukul, District- Amethi, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case. He is in jail since 10.10.2024. He further submits that as per the prosecution case, 11 persons caused injury to the deceased and informant of the case is an eye witness. He also submits that only general allegations have been levelled against all the accused persons and the statement of the informant was recorded under Section 180 BNSS in which no specific allegations have been levelled against the applicant. He further submits that in the site plan, location of the informant as well as other alleged eye witnesses have not been shown.

¶12

It is further submitted that the applicant has explained his criminal history in para 28 of the bail application in which he has been granted bail. He submits that co-accused Shiv Murat Singh and Ravi Yadav @ Ashish Yadav, who were assigned the similar role, have been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court as well as by this Court vide orders dated 12.06.2025

¶13

BAIL No. 5445 of 2025

¶14

¶15

and 12.8.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 5244 of 2025 and 2850 of 2025, to which the applicant seeks parity. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶16

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submits that informant as well as witnesses have categorically stated the presence of the applicant at the place of incident, but he does not dispute this fact that in the site plan the location of the informant as well as other witnesses has not been shown.

¶17

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A., material available on record, contents of F.I.R., other relevant documents, nature of offence as well as facts and circumstances of the case as also the fact that it is a case of parity with the bail orders of co-accused named above, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶19

Let applicant Gulab Singh alias Yashraj Singh, be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶21

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶22

(iii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶23

(iv) 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. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶24

BAIL No. 5445 of 2025

¶25

¶26

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶27

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 209 of B.N.S.

¶28

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶29

September 17, 2025 kkb/

¶30

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Gulab Singh @ Yeshraj Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulab Singh @ Yeshraj Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pragyesh Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Aviation, Lko. and Another

Chand Kumar @ Kallu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Suraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

Shubham Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Zeeshan Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prn. Secy. Home Deptt. and 3 Others

Udayraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko.