Allahabad High Court
RAMHARI YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- JAI PRAKASH TIWARI
Holding
The Court held that the applicant is entitled to bail and allowed the bail application.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ramhari Yadav, who was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No. 12 of 2026) involving several IPC offences including sections 316(2), 340(2), 336(3), 61(2), 338 and 318(4). The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, was not named in the FIR, and that his name only appeared in a later informant statement, asserting his innocence and willingness to cooperate with the trial. The Assistant Government Advocate opposed bail but did not dispute the applicant’s claim of false implication. After reviewing the record and the nature of the allegations, the Court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, found the circumstances suitable for granting bail. Accordingly, the Court ordered the release of the applicant on personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to standard bail conditions. The order clarified that the observations were limited to the bail application and would not affect the trial’s merits.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant, who alleges false implication and was not named in the FIR, is entitled to bail under the applicable criminal procedure law?
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 316(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- Indian Penal Code
- IPC sections
- sureties
- court conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34775 of 2026
Ramhari Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jitendra Kumar Yadav, Sandeep Kumar
Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused
the record.
2. The applicant is involved in Case Crime No. 12 of 2026 under Sections
-316(2), 340(2), 336(3), 61(2), 338, 318(4) BNS Police Station -Puwaya
District -Shahjahanpur.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The
applicant was not named in the FIR, his name came into light in the
subsequent statement of the informant. No any document has been
prepared, signed or delivered by the applicant. There is criminal history of
one case against the applicant, which has been explained in the affidavit
filed in support of the bail application.The applicant is in jail since
18.06.2026. Therefore, the applicant is entitled for bail. Learned counsel
for the applicant has further submitted that if the applicant is released on
bail, the applicant would not misuse liberty of bail and is ready to co-
operate in the trial.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he has not disputed
the above contention made by the learned counsel for the accused-
applicant.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the
record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced
BAIL No. 34775 of 2026
2
by the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion
on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
6. Let applicant -Ramhari Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid
case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable
sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned
subject to following conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of
justice:-
(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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
September 30, 2026
S.K.
Digitally signed by :-
SWEETY KANOJIA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…