Vinaypal Alias Shikari vs State of U.P. and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10549 of 2025

¶3

Vinaypal Alias Shikari

¶4

.....Appellant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Ankit Saran, Ram Murti Yadav, Rohan Gupta
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 50

¶6

HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.

¶7

1.Supplementary affidavits on behalf of the appellant and counter affidavit on behalf of the State have been filed which is taken on record. As per the office report, the notice has been served upon the opposite party no.2.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

This Criminal appeal has been filed by the learned counsel for the appellant under Section 14-A (2) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for setting aside the impugned order dated 24.10.2025 in bail application no. 1999 of 2025 and to release him in Case Crime No. 159 of 2025, under Sections 191 (2), 191 (3), 115 (2), 109 (1), 352, 351 (3) B.N.S. and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Shivrajpur, District Kanpur Nagar.

¶10

4.As per the prosecution case, there is allegation against the appellant that the appellant along with other co-accused has committed marpeet with the kicks fits and danda to the injured persons.

¶11

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant-applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The appellant has not committed the alleged offence. The appellant has no concern with the alleged incident. False allegation has been made against the appellant. There is no cogent evidence against the appellant. The impugned FIR of

¶12

CRLA No. 10549 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

the alleged incident has been lodged against six named person and four unknown persons and out of them two named persons have been exonerated. There is no specific role has been assigned to the all accused person including the appellant. No weapon has been assigned in the hands of appellant. The injuries of the injured persons are simple in nature. The appellant is a student. It has further been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that till date no charge has been framed against the appellant and other co-accused. There is no possibility to early disposal of trial. The appellant is in jail since 10.8.2025.

¶15

On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶16

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully.

¶17

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail.

¶18

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.

¶19

Let the appellant Vinayapal @ Shikari, involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence.

¶24

CRLA No. 10549 of 2025

¶25

3

¶26

(v) The appellant 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.

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before the competent Court.

¶31

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

¶32

April 2, 2026 A.

¶33

Digitally signed by :- AFAQ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vinaypal Alias Shikari v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinaypal Alias Shikari v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Pintu Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Pintu Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajpati Yadav vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Neha Jaiswal vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Himanshu Dwivedi vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajit Singh vs State of U.P. and Another