Ankit Yadav Vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13052 of 2026

Ankit Yadav

.....Applicant(s) Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Indra Bhan Yadav, Sujit Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rajesh Kumar Pandey

¶5

Court No. - 67

¶6

HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel holding brief of Sri Indra Bhan Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri DPS Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 534 of 2025, Sections- 103(1), 61(2) of B.N.S., Police Station- Bhadohi, District- Bhadho, during the pendency of the trial.

¶9

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant was not named in the FIR, wherein an allegation has been made that one Ertiga car coming from the Bhadohi side had hit the father of the first informant, resulting in his death. Subsequently, it was found that the said car in question was being driven by co-accused Sujit Yadav, and the name of the applicant surfaced as an accused in the statements of the garage owner, namely Ghalib Ansari, and the painter, namely Naushad Khan, wherein the only allegation against the applicant is that the applicant, along with co-accused Sujit Yadav, was also came to Garage. It is further submitted that there is no incriminating material against the applicant and the allegation is against co-accused Sujit Yadav, who was driving the car, and not against the applicant. It is further submitted that after filing of the present bail application, the Gangster Act has been invoked against the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶10

BAIL No. 13052 of 2026

¶11

2

¶12

It is further submitted that charge sheet has been filed in the present case, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation. The applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 22.02.2026. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶13

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶14

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and taking into account overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Let the applicant- Ankit Yadav, involved in the aforementioned 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, 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 cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶18

iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶19

iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him.

¶20

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

¶21

BAIL No. 13052 of 2026

¶22

3

¶23

cancellation of bail.

¶24

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶25

Verification of mobile number and Aadhar card of the applicant as well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.

¶26

It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.

¶27

It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant.

¶28

Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685.

¶29

(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)

¶30

April 20, 2026 SA

¶31

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

Ankit Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amzad Ali and 5 Others vs 1/1. Khairunnisha and Others

Mohd Asif @ Durrani vs State of U.P.

Vimlesh Kumar vs State of U.P.

Adil Vs State of U.P.

Naresh Vs State of U.P.

Upendra Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P.