Yog Sagar Alias Bachchu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33779 of 2025

Yog Sagar Alias Bachchu

.....Applicant(s)

Versus State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Birendra Singh, Pushpendra Singh, Swati Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Court No. - 46

¶5

HON'BLE AJAY BHANOT, J.

¶6

Matter is taken up in the revised call. This is the second bail application.

¶7

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.- 28 of 2023 at Police Station Naraini, District- Banda under Section 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act. The applicant is languishing in jail since 06.07.2023.

¶8

The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on 20.05.2024.

¶9

The following arguments made by Ms. Swati Singh, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Sri Rishi Chaddha, learned AGA-I from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶10

The applicant is a law abiding citizen who cooperated in the investigation and has joined the trial proceedings. The applicant never tampered with the evidence nor influenced any witness.

¶11

The applicant never adopted any dilatory tactics or impeded the process of the trial.

¶12

Status report sent by the trial court records that only three

¶13

BAIL No. 33779 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

witnesses have been examined till date.

¶16

The victim as well as the principal witnesses of fact including the victim has already been examined.

¶17

There is no possibility of the applicant in influencing the aforesaid witnesses.

¶18

During the course of prosecution evidences various discrepancies regarding the age of the victim and in particular her minority status have come forth.

¶19

Continued incarceration of the applicant will disable him from crafting an effective defence strategy and prevent him from gathering evidence in his support and tendering the same before the learned trial court to establish his innocence. Further detention of the applicant will be detrimental to his defence in the trial and inconsistent with the norms of fairness in criminal processual jurisprudence. In fact such detention of the applicant in these facts will be punitive in nature. [Ref: Prabhat Gangwar v. State of U.P. (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2586 of 2023), Asha v. State of U.P. (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.13193 of 2025 and Vikas Kanjad v. State of U.P. (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19170 of 2025)]

¶20

The victim has produced false documents regarding her age only to implicate the applicant under the stringent provision of the POCSO Act. The applicant has been advised to produce defence evidence to establish the majority of the victim.

¶21

The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶22

The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the trial proceedings. There is no possibility of the applicant influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶23

BAIL No. 33779 of 2025

¶24

3

¶25

In wake of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed .

¶26

It is clarified that the submissions regarding the defence are without prejudice to the accused and the defence proposed to be tendered on his behalf without being limited or influenced by this order.

¶27

Let the applicant- Yog Sagar @ Bachchu be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶28

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

¶29

(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶30

The learned trial court is directed to fix the sureties after due application of mind in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Arvind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. (Application U/S 482 No.2613 of 2023) . The learned trial court shall ensure that the right of bail of the applicant granted by this Court is not frustrated by arbitrary demands of sureties or onerous conditions which are unrelated to the socioeconomic status of the applicant.

¶31

It is further directed that in case the applicant does not cooperate in the trial or adopts dilatory tactics, the learned trial court shall record a finding to this effect and cancel the bail without recourse to this Court.

¶32

(Ajay Bhanot,J.)

¶33

April 23, 2026 Virendra

¶34

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

Yog Sagar Alias Bachchu v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yog Sagar Alias Bachchu v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Rambeer @ Bablu Vs State of U.P. Though It Principal Secretary (Home) and Another

Aarti vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Brijesh Kumar @ Builder vs State of U.P.