Brijesh Yadav vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:73445

Court No. - 86

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5490 of 2025

Applicant :- Brijesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Shankar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

This is the third bail application moved on behalf of the applicant. The first Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14330 of 2021 and second Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 54481 of 2023 have been rejected by this Court vide orders dated 15.03.2020 and 30.01.2024.

¶7

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

¶8

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that by the efflux of time, trial began and during the trial, the statements of P.W.1, P.W. 2 and P.W.3 were recorded and they have not supported the prosecution version, whereas after rejection of the second bail application, the statements of P.W.3, P.W.4 and P.W.5 have been recorded in which P.W.5 is the sister of the deceased and she has not supported the prosecution version. He thus submits that no offence against the applicant is made out. Apart from it, learned counsel further argued that the applicant had already undergone incarceration of more than half of the minimum sentence and therefore the applicant is also entitled for bail. Several other submissions in order to

¶9

demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 20.01.2021, having no criminal history.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence, and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let applicant Brijesh Yadav involved in Sessions Trial No. 150 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No. 157 of 2019 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C., and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Bagahuchghat, District Deoria, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

A. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

B. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

C. The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

D. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is an accused, or suspected, of the commission of he is suspected.

¶17

E. 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

¶19

The trial Court is also directed to consider and decide the trial of the aforesaid case as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.

¶20

Order Date :- 7.5.2025

¶21

S.Ali

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Brijesh Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brijesh Yadav v. State of U.P.

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 Shah Gupta vs State of U.P.

Asif vs State of U.P.

Sadab vs State of U.P.

Suraj Gupta vs State of U.P.

Neelu @ Umesh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vivek Shah Gupta vs State of U.P.