Allahabad High Court

RAJVEER SINGH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 22 April 2026
Disposal: Allowed/Partly Allowed on merits
Bench: SAMEER JAIN

Holding

The Court held that the applicant is entitled to bail and granted it subject to conditions.

Summary

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Rajveer Singh Yadav, who was accused under several IPC sections for allegedly hurting Hindu religious sentiments through a book he edited and statements attributed to a co‑accused. The FIR was originally against Saroj Sargam; Yadav was later implicated based on her police statement and his editorial role, though no direct evidence linked him to the alleged offence or any disturbance of public order. The applicant argued that his arrest was effected without communicating the grounds, contravening the Supreme Court’s decision in Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana, and that the bail amount imposed shortly after arrest indicated administrative excess. The State contended that the editorial involvement made him culpable, but could not produce evidence beyond the co‑accused’s statement. The Court found the prosecution’s case weak, noted the procedural lapse in arrest, and held that the offences are bailable and triable by a magistrate, leading to the grant of bail with conditions.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant’s role as editor of a book alleged to hurt religious sentiments makes him liable under the cited IPC provisions.
Whether the absence of evidence of public order disturbance justifies granting bail.
Whether the failure to communicate the grounds of arrest violates the precedent set in Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana and warrants bail.
Whether the applicant’s prior criminal history precludes bail in the present case.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 196, 299, 336(3), 338, 340(2), 353, 61(2)

Subjects

bail
religious sentiment
hate speech
IPC sections
violation of arrest grounds
magistrate trial
public order
editor
book

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37972 of 2025

Rajveer Singh Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Biswajeet Mukherjee, Kamal Krishna
Roy, Ramesh Kumar, Vineet Vikram
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Brajesh Pratap Singh, G.A.

Court No. - 66

HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

1. Heard Sri R.C.Yadav, learned Advocate, holding brief of Sri Vishwa Jeet
Mukherji, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Brijesh Pratap Singh,
learned counsel for the informant and Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA-I, for
the State.

2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with
the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.190 of 2025, under
Sections 299, 196,353, 61(2), 338, 336(3) and 340(2) BNS, Police Station
Kotwali City, District Mirzapur during pendency of the trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that FIR of the present case was
lodged against co-accused Saroj Sargam with the allegation that she hurt the
sentiments of the Hindu Community by using abusive language against
Hindu Deity but during investigation when her statement was recorded by
Police then she stated that applicant was the person who provided material to
her which she used in her songs and after the statement of co-accused Saroj
Sargam who was nominated in the FIR, applicant has also been made
accused in the present matter.

4. He further submits that apart from the statement of co-accused Saroj
Sargam before the Police, as per prosecution from the possession of the
applicant a book was also recovered which also hurt the feelings of the
Hindu Community but admittedly that book has not been written by
applicant though applicant is the editor of the book.
BAIL No. 37972 of 2025
2

5. He further submits, merely being Editor of alleged book it cannot be said
that applicant also hurt the religious sentiments of a community.

6. He further submits that however as per allegation due to the conduct of
the applicant religious sentiments of a community has been hurt but there is
no evidence that due to this any public order has also been disturbed.

7. He further submits that FIR of the present case was lodged on 23.9.2025
and immediately thereafter through the statement of nominated co-accused
Saroj Sargam applicant has been made accused and he has been arrested on
25.9.2025, i.e., within two days but in two days award of Rs. 25,000/- has
been declared against him and this shows high handedness of the
Administration.

8. He further submits that in paragraph-17 of the affidavit filed in support of
the instant bail application applicant has specifically made an averment that
at the time of arrest ground of arrest has not been communicated to the
applicant and thus his arrest was in violation of the law laid down by the
Apex Court in the case of Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana and
another , (2025) 5 Supreme Court Cases 799.

9. He next submits that even in the counter affidavit filed by State in
paragraph-9 this fact has been admitted that the ground of arrest has not been
supplied to the applicant at the time of his arrest and, therefore, in view of
the observations made by Apex Court in the case of Vihaan Kumar
(Supra), applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

10. He further argued that however, apart from the present case applicant is
having criminal history of two other cases but his criminal history has been
explained in the paragraph-28 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant
bail application and in one case relates to Case Crime No. 271 of 2025
applicant has been made accused subsequent to the present case and another
case is of the year 2017 and in this case no summon has been served to him.

11. He further submits that in the present matter applicant is in jail since
26.9.2025, i.e., for the last more than six months.

12. He further submits that therefore, considering the overall facts and
circumstances of the case, including the material collected by Investigating
Officer during investigation and incarceration of applicant, he should be
released on bail.
BAIL No. 37972 of 2025
3

13. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that due to conduct of
the applicant and co-accused Saroj Sargam sentiments of Hindu Community
have been badly hurt and as applicant is the Editor of one highly
objectionable Book therefore it cannot be said that he did not hurt the
sentiments of Hindu Community.

14. They however could not dispute the fact that except the statement of co-
accused recorded before the Police and the fact that applicant is Editor of a
controversial book there is no other evidence against him.

15. They also could not dispute the fact that there is no evidence that due to
the conduct of the applicant any public order has been disturbed.

16. They also could not dispute the fact that at the time of arrest the ground
of arrest has not been communicated to the applicant.

17. They however further submitted that apart from the present case,
applicant is having criminal history of two cases including a case relating to
Case Crime No. 271 of 2025 in which also with regard to similar allegation
like present case he has been made accused but they again could not dispute
the fact that in this case applicant has been made accused after the present
case.

18. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant also could not
dispute the fact that however, applicant has been arrested within two days
but in spite of that award of Rs. 25,000/- has been declared against him.

19. They further could not dispute the fact that all the offences are triable by
Magistrate and applicant is in jail for the last more than six months.

20. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the
case.

21. However, as per allegation applicant and co-accused Saroj Sargam hurt
the religious sentiments of Hindu Community but it reflects that applicant
was not named in the FIR and in the FIR the allegation of hurting the
religious sentiment was only against co-accused Saroj Sargam.

22. It reflects that during investigation applicant has been made accused in
the present matter through the statement of nominated co-accused Saroj
BAIL No. 37972 of 2025
4

Sargam recorded before the Police. Record also suggests that however,
apart from the statement of co-accused there is also allegation that applicant
is the Editor of one of controversial book which hurts religious sentiments
and except above evidence, there is no other evidence against the applicant
on record.

23. As per allegation applicant also hurt the sentiments of Hindu Community
but there is no evidence that either due to his act or conduct public order has
ever been disturbed.

24. Further, however, it appears award of Rs. 25000/- has been declared
against applicant as according to prosecution applicant was evading his
arrest but it reflects applicant has been arrested in the present matter within
two days and therefore prima facie it cannot be said that he was trying to
evade his arrest.

25. Further, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history
of two other cases but in one case he has been made accused subsequent to
present matter and another case is of the year 2017.

26. Further, all the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate and except
offence uner Section 338 BNS all the alleged offences are punishable with
maximum punishment of seven years and in the present case applicant is in
jail for the last more than six months.

27. Further, law is settled that unless proven guilty, an accused is deemed to
be innocent and bail application should not be dismissed either for punitive
or preventive purpose

28. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed
above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

29. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the instant bail application is allowed.

30. Let the applicant -Rajveer Singh Yadav 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 the court concerned with the following
conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless
his personal presence is exempted.
BAIL No. 37972 of 2025
5

(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.

31. 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.

32 . 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.

April 23, 2026
SKM
(Sameer Jain,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…