Bachcha Yadav @ Virendra Yadav vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:24642

Court No. - 35

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5992 of 2025

Applicant :- Bachcha Yadav @ Virendra Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Nath Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Bachcha Yadav @ Virendra Yadav with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.67 of 2021, under sections 411, 413, 414, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station- Lalapur, District- Prayagraj, during pendency of trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that the co-accused persons, namely, Rohit Pandey, Mukund Singh, Pradeep Kumar Tiwari @ Pradeep Tiwari, Neeraj Mishra, Vijay Pandey, Mukesh Kumar Upadhyay and Pankaj Singh @ Atul Singh have already been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 25.01.2022, 09.09.2021, 23.09.2021, 2.12.2021, 27.09.2021, 18.11.2021 and 15.3.2024 passed in Cri. Misc. Bail Application Nos.43087 of 2021, 33262 of 2021, 32978 of 2021, 40719 of 2021, 31073 of 2021, 48711 of 2021 and 9055 of 2024 and the case of the applicant stands on similar footings, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. He further submits that the applicant has criminal history of eight cases, which have been explained in para 16 of the affidavit. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of

¶9

law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.2.2024.

¶10

I have perused the bail order of the co-accused and find that the role assigned to the present applicant is almost similar to that of co-accused person, who has already been granted bail by this Court.

¶11

On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the application for bail but could not dispute the submission raised by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶13

Let the applicant- Bachcha Yadav @ Virendra Yadav , who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶14

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶15

(ii) 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 under Section 229-A IPC.

¶16

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if 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 174-A IPC.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

¶19

In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

With the above observation/direction, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶22

Order Date :- 20.2.2025 Krishna*

¶23

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bachcha Yadav @ Virendra Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bachcha Yadav @ Virendra 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

Similar cases

Munna vs State of U.P. and Another

Sommay Jain vs State of U.P.

Manoj Singh vs State of U.P.

Mustafa vs State of U.P. and Another

Paras Rajpoot vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Magan vs State of U.P. and Another