Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Yogendra Alias Pepsi Don vs State Of U.P. on 11 November, 2025





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:198639
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38202 of 2025   
 
   Yogendra Alias Pepsi Don    
 
  .....Applicant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State of U.P.    
 
  .....Opposite Party(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Applicant(s)   
 
:   
 
Arun Kumar Vishvakarma   
 
  
 
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A., Pradeep Kumar Yadav, Shantanu Srivastava   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 69
 
   
 
 HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.       

1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Arun Kumar Vishvakarma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shantanu Srivastava, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri D.P.S. Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. Instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.513 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 125, 351(3) BNS, Police Station- Tajganj, District Agra.

4. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that injury report of the injured shows that there is no fracture in any wound and general allegation has been made against all the accused persons. Charge sheet has been filed by the police, therefore, there is no requirement for custodial interrogation. The applicant has explained the criminal history of five cases in the accompanied affidavit and he is languishing in jail since 30.07.2025. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the first informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the injured has assigned specific role to the applicant for causing stab wound which is duly substantiated by the injury report, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

6. Thus, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the fact that specific allegation has been made against the applicant for causing stab wound to the injured Kaushlendra Sharma as well as injury report of injured and taking into account of criminal history of the applicant, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant, at this stage. 7. Accordingly, the present bail application is rejected.

(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.) November 11, 2025 A.Kr.