Dhirendra Kumar @ Pankaj Yadav vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in F.I.R. No. 624 of 2024, under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) BNS, Police Station Madiyaon, District Lucknow with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant is the marginal witness in the sale deed and the purchaser of the property, namely, Gyan Singh @ Gyani has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 29.01.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 894 of 2025. It is lastly submitted that in near future, there is no possibility of conclusion of trial and the applicant, who has no criminal antecedent, is in jail since 24.03.2026. In such circumstances, applicant is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the applicant will never misuse the liberty of bail and shall fully cooperate in the trial.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant, but does not dispute that the applicant is the marginal

¶14

BAIL No. 2781 of 2026

¶15

2

¶16

witness of the sale deed and the purchaser has already been granted bail.

¶17

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of F.I.R., bail order dated 29.01.2025 as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that the purchaser of the property in question has already been granted bail and the applicant is the marginal witness of the sale deed. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Application stands allowed.

¶19

Let applicant -Dhirendra Kumar @ Pankaj Yadav be released on bail in F.I.R. No. 624 of 2024, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶20

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

¶21

(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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

(iii) 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.

¶23

(iv) 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 269 BNS.

¶24

BAIL No. 2781 of 2026

¶25

3

¶26

(v) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 BNSS 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 209 BNS.

¶27

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS. 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.

¶28

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶29

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

¶30

June 10, 2026 VKS

¶31

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dhirendra Kumar @ Pankaj Yadav v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhirendra Kumar @ Pankaj Yadav v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

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

Dilshad @ Mohd Dilshad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mohamad Rafique Ganisab Tamboli vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. / Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Ram Ashish vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rahul vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Saroj Yadav, and 36 Others vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Women and Child Development New Delhi and 20 Others

Gulshaad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others