Allahabad High Court
AJEET YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The bail application was rejected, denying the accused bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of accused Ajeet Yadav, who was charged with offences including assault and grievous hurt. The applicant’s counsel argued that the FIR was false, that no specific role was assigned to the applicant, and that he had no criminal antecedent or risk of fleeing. The State counsel countered that injured witnesses specifically identified the applicant as having delivered blows, making the crime heinous. After hearing both sides, the Court found the allegations and witness statements sufficient to deny bail. Consequently, the bail application was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused is entitled to bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in view of the nature of the offences and evidence.
- Whether the specific statements of injured witnesses implicating the accused justify denial of bail.
- Whether the accused poses a risk of flight or tampering with evidence.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 191(2), 333, 351(3), 352, 483
Subjects
- bail
- Section 483
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita
- assault
- grievous hurt
- high court
- false implication
- witness testimony
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8658 of 2026
Ajeet Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amar Nath Tiwari, Brij Lal Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shiv Sagar Singh
Court No. - 68
HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.
Heard Shri Amar Nath Tiwari and Shri B.L. Shukla, learned counsel for
the applicant, Shri Mayank Upadhyaya Advocate, holding brief of Shri
Shiv Sagar Singh, learned counsel for the first informant and Shri Rajesh
Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State respondents and perused the
record.
This bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Ajeet
Yadav, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 611 of 2025,
under Sections 109, 191 (2), 333, 115 (2), 352, 351 (3) B.N.S., Police
Station-Bansgaon, District-Gorakhpur.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is
innocent. He has been falsely implicated in the present case and is
languishing in jail since 24.11.2025. The allegations made in the First
Information Report are false and fabricated. First Information Report was
lodged by one Shri Vijay Pratap Singh, against 7 named accused persons
including the applicant with the allegation that on the date of incident all
the accused persons including the applicant, assaulted the brother of the
first informant namely Virendra and when he fled away from the spot, all
the accused persons came to the house of the first informant and assaulted
the family members of the first informant with Danda, Hockey, Spade and
some other sharp edged weapon with an intention to kill them in which
one Arti W/o Arjun, Mamta W/o Manoj, father of the first informant
namely Kunjbihari, Kailash S/o Ramsakal, Meena, mother of the first
informant namely Nirmala Devi and Rajpati W/o Late Harbansh
sustained severe injuries. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that
only general allegations levelled against the applicant. No specific role
has been assigned to the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant
further submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession or
pointing out of the applicant. Applicant has no criminal antecedent and
there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering
BAIL No. 8658 of 2026
2
with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.
Shri Mayank Upadhyaya Advocate, holding brief of Shri Shiv Sagar
Singh, learned counsel for the first informant and Shri Rajesh Kumar
Singh, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail application of the
applicant stating that the the applicant and other co-accused persons beat
up all the injured persons in which they have sustained severe injuries.
They further submit that the injured Arti, who has sustained severe injury
over her head, in her statement has specifically assigned the role of giving
blow over her head to the applicant and one other co-accused Akash
Yadav. Similarly, injured Kunj Bihari Yadav, has specifically assigned
the role of attacking with hockey to his son Virendra, to the applicant, in
which he sustained severe injuries hence the applicant is not entitled for
bail and his bail application is liable to be rejected.
Considering the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the
first informant and learned AGA, statements of the injured, heinousness
of crime but without expressing any final opinion about these submissions
and merit of the case, the applicant does not deserve to be enlarge on bail,
accordingly, this Bail Application stands rejected.
(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)
April 8, 2026
Ravi/Deepak/
Digitally signed by :-
DEEPAK KUMAR KUSHWAHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…