Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 52283 (ALL)

YOGESH KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P.

BAIL/14646/2025 · 2025-05-16

Sameer Jain

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82520 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14646 of 2025 Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Mishra,Shailendra Kumar Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Shailendra Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shatrughan Yadav, learned AGA for the State- respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 21 of 2025, under Sections 179, 180, 181, 111(2) BNS, Police Station Kuthaund, District Jalaun, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that as per allegation, from the possession of the applicant Rs. Forty one hundred fake currencies were recovered but entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false. 4. He further submitted that there is neither any evidence that applicant was either member of any crime syndicate or he acted on behalf of such syndicate and applicant is also having no previous criminal history but inspite of that applicant has also been challaned for offence under section 111 BNS and this fact clearly suggests that investigating officer misused the provisions of organized crime. 5. He further submitted that alongwith the applicant co-accused Harveer was also made accused and from his possession seventy counterfeited notes were also recovered but he has been released on bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 7.5.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 15453 of 2025 and case of applicant is at par with him. 6. He further submitted that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 5.2.2025. 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. However, as per allegation applicant and other accused persons indulged in manufacturing of counterfeit currencies and from the possession of the applicant counterfeit currencies were also recovered but it reflects that alongwith applicant, co-accused Harveer was also arrested and from his possession also counterfeit currencies were recovered and he has been released on bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Court. 10. Further, however, applicant has also been challaned for offence under section 111 BNS i.e. organized crime but there is no cogent evidence that either he was member of any crime syndicate or he acted on behalf of such syndicate. 11. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter, he is in jail since 5.2.2025. 12. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 13. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 14. Let the applicant-Yogesh Kumar, 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 the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 15. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 16. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 17.5.2025 Ankita Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad