HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35007 of 2026 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J. 1. Sri Janardan Yadav, learned counsel for accused applicant hands up supplementary affidavit annexing the additional documents in support of the bail application, the same is taken on record. 1A. Heard Sri Yadav, learned counsel for accused applicant, Sri Brijesh Kumar Chaturvedi, learned counsel for informant and learned A.G.A. for State. 2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused- Jitendra Yadav to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 708 of 2026, under Sections 3(5), 115(2), 333, 140(1) of BNS, P.S.- Robertsganj, District- Sonbhadra, during the pendency of trial. 3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that an entirely forged and frivolous FIR has been lodged on 22.08.2026 by Asha Devi the mother of abductee Manoj Kumar Pandey against two named including the accused applicant and three anonymous persons with the allegation that accused persons came to the residence of the informant and abducted her son Manoj Kumar Pandey, who was later on released. It is the contention of learned counsel that no such abduction took place. There is an FIR lodged by the sister-in-law of accused applicant against the abductee and other persons that they have duped the accused persons of money for getting service. Learned counsel further submits that through supplementary affidavit, there a deed of compromise which has been executed between the parties for the return of the amount wherein the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashok Kumar Yadava, Janardan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Brijesh Kumar Chaturvedi, G.A., Sandeep Kumar Chaturvedi Jitendra Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) informant is one of the witness. Further submits that there is no injury on the person of abductee. The investigation is continuing and applicant is co-operating in the investigation. Further submits that co-accused has already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The applicant has no criminal history. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since 23.08.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on bail. 4. Learned counsel for informant and learned A.G.A. for State opposed the bail application and submit that abduction has been carried out. There is statement of the abductee. Hence, the bail application be rejected. 5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Considering the counterblast FIR which shows that the accused applicant had abducted the abductee having no injuries and co-accused has already been granted bail, the accused/applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 8. The accused/applicant 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 court concerned in view of observation made by the Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re [(2024)10SCC 685]. 9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and speedy disposal. October 9, 2026 Sharad/- BAIL No. 35007 of 2026 2 (Avnish Saxena,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad