Yadunath Singh Yadav @ Kavinder Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:55884

Court No. - 69

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2047 of 2025

Applicant :- Yadunath Singh Yadav @ Kavinder Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Mishra,Vinay Kumar Mishra

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶7

Supplementary affidavit filed by counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶8

Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State- opposite party, and perused the material placed on record.

¶9

This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.230 of 2024, under Section 109(1) B.N.S., Police Station Jansa, District Varanasi.

¶10

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. In the alleged incident no person has received any injury. During the course of investigation, the statement of one Manish Kumar Singh was recorded by the Investigating Officer. The said Manish Kumar Singh claims to have identified the applicant. It is contended that faces of the accused persons were covered. At this stage there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Criminal History of the applicant has been explained in paragraph no.12 of the supplementary affidavit. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶12

Counsel for the applicant further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report.

¶13

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for

¶14

the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and the fact that applicant was not named in the first information report, no person has received any injury in the alleged incident, the name of the applicant surfaced during the course of investigation, at this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶15

In the event of arrest, the applicant- Yadunath Singh Yadav @ Kavinder be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 193(3) B.N.S.S., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶17

(ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him, before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶19

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶20

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶21

The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶22

The application stands disposed of.

¶23

Order Date :- 16.4.2025 Manish Kr

¶24

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

Yadunath Singh Yadav @ Kavinder v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yadunath Singh Yadav @ Kavinder v. State of U.P. and Another

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