Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 91637 (ALL)

SATISH YADAV v. STATE OF U.P.

NABAIL/7451/2025 · 2025-09-16

Vivek Varma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7451 of 2025 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. The instant application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No. 108 of 2025 under Sections 331(4), 305 of B.N.S., Police Station Nagar, District Basti. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The name of the applicant disclosed by the co-accused, Shiva Gautam in police custody. The said statement, insofar as, it implicates the applicant is unreliable. The alleged mobile phones were recovered from the possession of the co-accused, Shiva Gautam. At this stage, there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para no. 15 of the affidavit. The investigation is still pending. It is next submitted that the applicant has apprehension of his arrest and in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ravindra Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Satish Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Counsel for the applicant further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report. 7. Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature of accusations and the fact that the applicant was not named in the first information report, the name of the applicant disclosed by the co-accused, Shiva Gautam in police custody, the alleged mobile phones were recovered from the possession of the co-accused, Shiva Gautam; at this stage, there is no substantive evidence against the applicant, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report. 8. 8. In the event of arrest, the applicant- Satish Yadav be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 193 (3) B.N.S.S., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned. 9. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. 10. The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail NABAIL No. 7451 of 2025 2 application of the applicant. 11. The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order. 12. The application stands disposed of. September 17, 2025 Sachin Mishra NABAIL No. 7451 of 2025 3 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad