SMT. ANJALI YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO
BAIL/1538/2025 · 2025-07-04
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 124496 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 124496 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:38056 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1538 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Anjali Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Purnendu Chakravarty Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Purnendu Chakravatry, learned counsel for the applicant, as well as Sri Ashok Kumar Srivastava, learned Additional Government Advocate, and perused the records.
2. This is the third application, seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.005 of 2023, under Sections 7/13(1) (b) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018), registered at Police Station Anti- Corruption, Kanpur, District ACO, U.P.
3. The first application for bail bearing Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.14037 of 2023 was rejected by means of an
order dated 08.04.2024 and the second application for bail bearing Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6182 of 2024 was rejected by means of an order dated 16.10.2024.
4. This third application for bail has been moved on the ground that after rejection of the second bail application, four prosecution witnesses have been examined by the trial Court, including trap laying officer, both the shadow witnesses and the complainant- Rajesh Kumar Sahu.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the prosecution has proposed to examine total 17 witnesses and the remaining witnesses are witnesses of formal nature as all the
witnesses of fact have already been examined. It has been further submitted that the applicant is a woman aged 28 years having no criminal history and she is languishing in jail since
04.10.2023.
6. Having considered the aforesaid facts, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.
7. Accordingly, this third bail application stands allowed.
8. Let the applicant- Smt. Anjali Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. [Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]
Order Date :- 4.7.2025 MVS/- Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench