Jaswant @ Yashwant and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Amit Kumar Sonkar who has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2 by filing vakalatnama which is taken on record.

¶10

The present application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime/FIR No. 110 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 110 B.N.S., P.S.- Jaitpur, District- Ambedkar Nagar.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the case due to animosity. He further submits that the applicants have no concern with the alleged fight in any manner. The alleged motive, which has been assigned to them, is totally false. It is further submitted that no specific role has been assigned to the applicants. As per medical report of the alleged injured Hargovind, he had sustained only one fracture injury on left temporal and right parietal bones and the prosecution is silent on this point that who is author of the said injury.

¶12

Learned counsel further submits that the maximum sentence provided under the offences in which the applicant is charged, is up to 7 years. The applicants have no previous criminal history. They have fully cooperated in the investigation. Charge-sheet in the case has been filed. The applicants undertake to cooperate in the trial.

¶13

NABAIL No. 733 of 2026

¶14

2

¶15

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶16

On due consideration to the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, material available on record and the fact that the applicants have no previous criminal history; charge-sheet in the case has been filed, the undertaking given by the applicants to cooperate in the trial as also the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Musheer Alam versus The State of U.P. and another 2025 SCC OnLine SC 116, it would be expedient in the interest of justice that the liberty of the applicants may be protected.

¶17

In view of the above, the applicants- Jaswant @ Yashwant, Abhinesh @ Pinku, Rajan and Satyam are directed to surrender before the trial court within a period of twenty days from today. Upon their surrender, the trial court shall release them on anticipatory bail, subject to their furnishing personal bonds and two sureties each of the same amount, to the satisfaction of the trial court, with the following conditions:-

¶18

(i) The applicants shall refrain from directly or indirectly inducing, threatening, or promising any person familiar with the facts of the case in a manner that may dissuade him from revealing such facts before the Court or result in tampering with the evidence;

¶19

(ii) The applicants shall not travel outside India without prior permission from the Court;

¶20

(iii) The applicants shall not attempt to influence or intimidate any prosecution witness;

¶21

(iv) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on all scheduled dates unless specifically exempted from personal appearance;

¶22

(v) In the event of any violation of the aforementioned conditions, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the applicants;

¶23

Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.

¶24

NABAIL No. 733 of 2026

¶25

3

¶26

It is made clear that the observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶27

In view of the aforesaid, the anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶28

(Rajeev Bharti,J.)

¶29

May 1, 2026

¶30

Shravan

¶31

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

Jaswant @ Yashwant and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaswant @ Yashwant and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

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

Dheer Bahadur Singh @ Shivam Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Shakeel vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Ram Achal Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Mohd. Arif @ Chhotu vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Abhishek Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Raja Mishra @ Manish Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.