Allahabad High Court
Devendra Prasad Yadav vs State Of U.P. on 13 October, 2025
Author: Santosh Rai
Bench: Santosh Rai
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:182150
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7952 of 2025
Devendra Prasad Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Kunwar Ajay Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Devendra Prasad Yadav with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.259 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Belipar, District Gorakhpur, during pendency of trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submitted that Rs.80,000/- was received from the informant in lieu of providing job to the sister of the informant in AIMS, Gorakhpur. The applicant has returned the aforesaid amount to the informant. The aforesaid fact has been mentioned in para-4 and 5 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit as explained in para-16 of the bail application and is languishing in jail since 25.01.2025. Chargesheet has been filed in this case. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but he admitted that Rs.80,000/- has been paid in favour of the informant. However, he contended that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
5. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; period of detention in jail, keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, bail application is allowed.
6. Considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail 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 that :-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C./269 B.N.S.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 B.N.S.S. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A I.P.C./209. B.N.S.
(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
7. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
8. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
(Santosh Rai,J.) October 13, 2025 Asha