Avinash Shukla @ Ashu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶13

This is first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No.0150 of 2020, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Raebareli.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is neither the seller nor purchaser of the land in question and the applicant did not receive any payment from the informant. He further submits that no specific role is assigned to the applicant, the dispute is purely civil in nature; the applicant has remained in jail since 15.04.2026; the case is triable by Magistrate; the applicant has no criminal history. Identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Rajesh Kumar and Ankur Shukla @ Ajitesh have been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.05.2025 and 30.01.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application Nos.3694 of 2025 and 869 of 2025 respectively, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶16

BAIL No. 3072 of 2026

¶17

2

¶18

On due consideration to the facts that the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.04.2026 having no previous criminal history; the case is triable by Magistrate; co-accused persons, namely, Rajesh Kumar and Ankur Shukla @ Ajitesh, having identical role, have been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.05.2025 and 30.01.2025 respectively and without entering into the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶19

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶20

Let the applicant Avinash Shukla alias Ashu be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶21

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶22

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court, either personally or through his counsel.

¶23

Any other condition(s) which the trial court/concerned court may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed.

¶24

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial.

¶25

May 12, 2026

¶26

Anand/-

¶27

(Rajeev Bharti,J.)

¶28

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

Avinash Shukla @ Ashu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avinash Shukla @ Ashu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jaleel @ Jalla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Lko.

Awadhesh Giri vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Secy. Home Lko.

Dheeraj Bahadur Singh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Paramjeet Singh @ Pamma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Binam Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Home Govt. Lko. and Another

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