Vinod Yadav vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3440 of 2026

¶3

Vinod Yadav

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko.	Deptt. Of Home ..	...Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) :	Dharmendra Pratap Singh, Singh, Anuj Kumar Gupta	Abhishek
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :	G.A.
Court No.- 13

¶6

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.

¶7

Shri Jai Kumar Soni, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of the informant and has filed his vakalatnama, which is taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

¶9

By means of the present bail application, the applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 0016 of 2026, under Sections 3(5), 115(2), 351(2), 109(1), 352 and 103(1) BNS (old Sections 34, 323, 506, 307, 504 and 302 IPC), Police Station Ram Nagar, District Barabanki, seeks enlargement on bail during trial.

¶10

The brief facts of the case are that an FIR dated 10.01.2026, under sections 3(5), 115(2), 351(2) and 109(1) B.N.S, has been lodged against four named accused persons, including the present applicant, alleging therein that on 09.01.2026 at around 7:00 p.m., all the four named accused persons tried to cultivate the agricultural field of the informant by a tractor and on opposing the same, they assaulted the informant and his relatives with lathi and danda. The condition of the husband of the informant became critical and he was referred to the District Hospital. Sections 352 and 103(1) BNS (old Sections 504 and 302 IPC) were added after the husband of the informant succumbed to his injuries.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the injured witness, who is the brother of the deceased, in his statement, has assigned the role of beating the deceased by lathi to co-accused Narendra and the role of beating the injured witness to co-accused Gajodhar and no role of beating the

¶12

BAIL No. 3440 of 2026

¶13

2

¶14

deceased or the injured witness has been assigned to the present applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 11.01.2026.

¶15

On the other hand, learned A.G.A., on the basis of instruction, and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but they could not dispute the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶16

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties, prima facie , from the statement of the injured witness, it appears that the role of assaulting the deceased and the injured witness by lathi has been assigned to co-accused Narendra and Gajodhar respectively, and no specific allegation has been levelled against the present applicant. Hence, this court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail.

¶17

Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶18

Let the applicant Vinod Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:-

¶19

(i) The applicant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial.

¶20

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶21

(iii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es).

¶22

(iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence.

¶23

(v) 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.

¶24

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

¶25

(vii) The applicant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court.

¶26

(viii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶27

In case of default of above conditions it shall be open for the trial court to

¶28

BAIL No. 3440 of 2026

¶29

3

¶30

treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶31

As this order relates to enlargement of the applicant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observations made in this order.

¶32

May 14, 2026 DiVYa

¶33

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶34

Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Vinod Yadav v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Yadav v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home 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

Similar cases

Amjad Ali vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Angad Gaud vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Suraj Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Devendra Singh @ Shiva Thakur vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

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

Uma Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another