YOGESHversusSTATE OF U.P.

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
         CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25470 of 2026

Yogesh
                                                          .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

State of U.P.
                                                             .....Opposite
                                                                   Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)          :   Javed Raza, Rajeev Nayan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)     :   G.A.

Court No. - 69
                   HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.

1. Learned AGA has filed counter affidavit, the same is taken on record.

1A. Sri Noor Ahmad, learned counsel holding brief appeared for the
accused applicant and hands up the rejoinder affidavit, the same is taken
on record.

1B. Heard Sri Javed Raza, learned counsel for accused applicant, Sri Noor
Ahmad, holding brief for accused/applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.

2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant/ accused-
 Yogesh to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 278 of 2026, under
Sections 137(2), 143(4), 61(2) BNS, P.S.- Aonla, District- Bareilly,
during the pendency of trial.

3. It is the contention of learned counsel for accused/applicant that the
accused applicant has been implicated during investigation in the FIR
dated 24.05.2026 lodged by one Raman with the allegation that on
24.05.2026 at about 10:30 a.m. his son was playing along with two other
children. After some time, the two children returned but his son aged
about 1-1/2 years did not return. He has lodged the FIR on 24.05.2026 at
about 15:34 hours for the said kidnapping. During investigation, the
police party on the basis of report of police informer has apprehended the
two accused persons, namely, Yogesh (the present applicant) and Pawan
in police encounter case and recovered the kidnapped child on
26.05.2026. It is the contention of learned counsel that the
                                                        BAIL No. 25470 of 2026
                               2


accused/applicant has been taken away from his house on 26.05.2026,
which has been reported by his brother Sumit Kumar on Dial 112 with the
averment that some persons had taken away his brother-Yogesh from the
house. It is the contention of learned counsel that a report is annexed at
page no. 23 of the rejoinder affidavit. He further drawn the attention of
the Court towards the copy of Regular Suit, wherein one Anil Kumar has
instituted a suit against seven persons including the accused/applicant. He
submits that Anil Kumar, who is step brother of the accused/applicant and
posted in the office of SSP, Bareilly, who is also a police personnel and
he used to falsely implicate the accused/applicant in the criminal cases
just to put pressure and to usurp the property. It is the contention of
learned counsel that it is under his influence that the accused/applicant
has been taken away from his house on 26.05.2026 and shown him with
the kidnapped child in the intervening night of 26/27.05.2026. He further
submits that during investigation the CCTV footage of the place of
incident, from where the child was kidnapped was taken into
consideration by the Investigating Officer, but nothing incriminating has
been found from the CCTV footage. He further submits that he is not
conversant about the co-accused Pawan, who was shown arrested along
with accused/applicant in the memo of arrest. He further submits that the
statement of Uttam Bajpai, who was stated to be instrumental in
trafficking of children has named the accused/applicant at the instance of
police person as the accused/applicant is also not conversant with Uttam
Bajpai. He submits that the charge sheet is submitted. He has criminal
history of three cases in two cases he is on bail and one case ended into
compromise. Further submits that the co-accused Sanjay Kumar Biswas
@ Sanjay Kumar and Sita have been granted bail by the coordinate Bench
of this Court. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since
27.05.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. for State has opposed the prayer for bail and submits
that there is clinching evidence against the accused/applicant from whom
the police has recovered the kidnapped child and the police persons has
also suffered injuries. Hence seeks that the bail application be rejected.

4A. Countering the argument, learned counsel for the accused/applicant
submits that the injury caused to the police personnel is inconsistent to the
                                                                                             BAIL No. 25470 of 2026
                                                                    3


                                    ocular evidence as the injury is not stated to be of gun shot. Further
                                    submits that the memo of arrest and recovery has been carried out in
                                    absence of independent witnesses. It is not controverted that the brother of
                                    accused/applicant has called on Dial 112 to intimate that some persons
                                    had taken away his brother.

                                    5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
                                    learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

                                    6. Considering the complicity of accused/applicant and there is apparently
                                    marked infirmity in the material collected against the accused/applicant
                                    during the investigation and non disclosure of the report lodged by the
                                    brother of accused on Dial 112, which was abruptly called by the police
                                    with the thumb impression of some Smt. Long Devi as is shown in the
                                    rejoinder affidavit, 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.



                                                                                             (Avnish Saxena,J.)
                                    September 8, 2026
                                    Abhishek Sri.




Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad