Allahabad High Court

RAMESH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA

Holding

The court held that bail should be granted to the accused, subject to strict conditions.

Summary

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of accused Ramesh Yadav, who was charged under IPC sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120‑B for a case registered at Kotwali Police Station, Deoria. The applicant claimed innocence, alleging that the main perpetrator was the shop manager Ajay Tiwari and that he was merely a shop employee. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the risk of witness tampering. The court examined the nature of the accusations, the severity of potential punishment, and the possibility of evidence tampering, and, without deciding on the merits, found that a case for bail existed. Consequently, the court granted bail subject to a personal bond, two sureties of at least Rs.1 lakh each, and conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence, criminal activity, intimidation of witnesses, and ensuring regular court appearances.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to Ramesh Yadav under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in view of the charges under IPC sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120‑B.
Whether there is a reasonable risk of the accused tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses if released on bail.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
Indian Penal Code — s. 120-B, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
Section 483 B.N.S. 2023
IPC offences
witness tampering
sureties
court conditions

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31273 of 2025

Ramesh Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudhanshu Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Aushim Luthra, G.A., Irshad Husain

Court No. - 68
HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard Shri Sudhanshu Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri
Yagyavalk Pandey, learned AGA for the State, Shri Aushim Luthra, learned
counsel for the first informant and perused the record.

This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Ramesh
Yadav, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 970 of 2024, under
Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B IPC, Police Station Kotwali,
District Deoria during the pendency of the trial before the Court below.

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is
innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and
is languishing in jail since 1.6.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant
submits that there is a dispute of deposit of money between licensee and the
Manager. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that Reena Kediya,
stockiest, in her statement stated that main accused of the occurrence is Ajay
Tiwari, who works there as a Manager and used to look after all the business
related affairs and the applicant was working in the shop. Learned counsel
for the applicant submits that role of the applicant is clearly distinguishable
from main accused Ajay Tiwari. Learned counsel for the applicant submits
that charge sheet in this case has already been filed on 24.8.2025. Further
custodial interrogation of the applicant is no more required. Applicant is
ready to face trial. Applicant has one case of criminal antecedent, which has
sufficiently been explained and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from
course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail.
BAIL No. 31273 of 2025
2

Hence, bail has been prayed for.

Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the first informant vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations,
severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting
evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima
facie, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

Let the accused-applicant, Ramesh Yadav, involved in above mentioned
case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and
two reliable heavy sureties (not below Rs.1 lacs) each, in the like amount to
the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and
co-operate in the trial.

4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the
trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by
the court concerned.

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below
will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)
May 6, 2026
Ravi Prakash

Digitally signed by :-
RAVI PRAKASH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…