Vijay Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4091 of 2025

Vijay Yadav

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Appellant(s) : Sanjai Kumar Singh, Nilay Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 27

¶8

HON'BLE RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.

¶9

Order on Bail Application

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State on bail application pending in appeal and perused the record.

¶11

The instant criminal appeal under section 374 (2) Cr. P.C. read with under section 415(2) BNSS has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 26.11.25, passed by learned Special Judge Gangster/Additional Sessions judge, Court No.5, Lucknow, in Special Trial no. 295 of 2010 "State vs Gangabux Singh & others" in relation to Case Crime no. 464/2009, U/s 2/3 U.P. Gangster Act P.S.-Cantt, DistrictLucknow, by which he convicted and sentenced the appellant under section 2(ख) (1) read with section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster Act for rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and the fine of Rs. 500,000/- and in default of the payment of the fine Rigorous imprisonment of 1 year.

¶12

Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a certificate and a certified copy of the appeal dated 11/5/2026 passed by the division bench of this court in criminal appeal number 1440 of 2024 whereby the appellant has been enlarged on bail in ST No. 1140/2009 arising out of case crime number 251 of 2009 PS Kant district Lucknow, wherein the appellantapplicant has been convicted under sections 147, 148, 149, and 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment and fined, with default stipulations.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the provision of the

¶14

CRLA No. 4091 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

Gangster Act was invoked against the appellant on the basis of said murder case under section 302 IPC. He was not charge-sheeted under section 3/25 of the Arms Act and this case is mentioned in the gangster chart against the appellant, in which he was released on bail during the pendency of bail by the aforesaid orders. He has no other criminal history. He has held in jail custody in the present case since 29/3/2024 and this fact is shown in the affidavit accompanying the bail application. The appeal is not likely to be heard in the near future due to the heavy backlog. The appellant was enlarged on bail during trial and there is no allegation regarding misuse of liberty of bail. He undertakes that he shall abide by the conditions as imposed by this court if he is granted liberty of bail.

¶17

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the appellant is convicted in a murder case along with other coaccused persons, but he has not disputed the fact that he has been released on bail in the criminal appeal preferred against a judgement and order passed in the said case under Section 302 IPC.

¶18

Considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the quantum of sentence awarded to the appellant, the period of jail custody, and the fact that he was enlarged on bail during trial, and he has been released on bail in criminal case in ST number 1140 of 2009 under section 302 IPC without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.

¶19

Let the appellant,namely, Vijay Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid Sessions Trial number during the pendency of appeal on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶20

On acceptance of bail bonds and personal bonds, the lower court shall transmit photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on record.

¶21

The appellants has undertaken not to indulge into any anti-social activity particularly against the informant and in the event of any such incident it shall be open to the complainant to make an application for cancellation of bail.

¶22

CRLA No. 4091 of 2025

¶23

3

¶24

As regards fine, the appellant is directed to deposit Rs.1,00,000/within a month from the total fine of Rs.5,00,000/- awarded to him in the impugned judgement order after his release from jail pursuant to present bail order and remaining Rs.4,00,000/- of fine shall be stayed during pendency of the appeal.

¶25

Order of Appeal

¶26

List the appeal in due course for hearing.

¶27

(Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.)

¶28

May 21, 2026 dk/

¶29

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

Vijay Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

Vijay Yadav 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rashhed Quraisi @ Mohd. Rasheed @ Lallu vs Union of India Thru. Intelligence Officer Narcotics Control Bureau, Lucknow

Ajay Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Karm Singh Verma @ Gore vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Fakire vs State of U.P. Thru. Competent Authority Central Bureau of Investigation, Lko

Najimi Begum vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko

Shiva Gaud vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another