Yaseen Pathan @ Yaseen Ghoda Vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12969 of 2026

Yaseen Pathan @ Yaseen Ghoda

	Versus		...	..Applicant(s)
State of U.P.				.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Sanjeev	Kumar	Khare
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 69

¶6

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶7

1. Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar Khare, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.P. Maurya, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶8

2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 625 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109(1), 351(2), 3(5) BNS and Section 3/25 Arms Act, registered at Police Station Kotwali Mahoba, District Mahoba, during pendency of the trial.

¶9

3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he has been languishing in jail since 28.12.2025. It is further submitted that though the applicant has been assigned specific role of assault by fire arm, however, no one has received injury of fire arm. It is further submitted that chargesheet has already been submitted. It is further submitted that applicant is having criminal history of seven cases which has been duly explained in the memo of application. It is also submitted that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶10

4 . On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.

¶11

BAIL No. 12969 of 2026

¶12

2

¶13

5 . The applicant has been assigned specific role of assault by fire arm, however, no one is said to have received injury of fire arm. Chargesheet has already been submitted. The applicant is having criminal history of seven cases which has been duly explained in the memo of application.

¶14

6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED .

¶15

7 . Let the applicant- Yaseen Pathan @ Yaseen Ghoda involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶16

(i) 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.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.

¶19

(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 the trial court.

¶20

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶21

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

¶22

9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of

¶23

BAIL No. 12969 of 2026

¶24

3

¶25

determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶26

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶27

April 20, 2026 Abhishek

¶28

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Yaseen Pathan @ Yaseen Ghoda v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yaseen Pathan @ Yaseen Ghoda 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

Mohan vs State of U.P.

Kaushlendra vs State of U.P.

Pramod Baiga vs State of U.P.

Akhil Vs State of U.P.

Yogesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Kishan Pal @ Punch Vs State of U.P.