Rama Yadav vs State Of U.P.

Heard Shri Bipin Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Arimardan Yadav, learned AGA for the State, Shri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, 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, Rama Yadav, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 252 of 2025, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Amariya, District Pilibhit, 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 2.2.2026. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not named in the FIR. During course of investigation, his name surfaced on record. FIR has been lodged with the delay of 02 years without any plausible explanation for delay in lodging the FIR. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per prosecution case, allegation against the applicant along with co-accused persons have duped the first informant for securing his job in a government department. Applicant is not beneficiary of the money in any manner. The transaction of money alleged to be shown in the account of applicant does not connect the applicant with the present case crime number. The ground of arrest has not been communicated to the applicant, which is mandatory requirement of law and as such, the arrest becomes void ab initio. Much emphasis has been drawn by learned counsel for the applicant to the Para 13 of decision of the Apex Court rendered in case of Deepak Kumar Shrivas and another versus State of Chattisgarh and others, reported in 2024 INSC 117, which is as under:-

"13. A reading of the entire material on record clearly reflects that it was totally an unlawful contract between the parties where money was being paid for securing a job in the government department(s) or private sector. Apparently, a suit for recovery could not have been filed for the said purpose and even if it could be filed, it could be difficult to establish the same where the payment was entirely in cash. Therefore, the respondent no.6 found out a better medium to recover the said amount by building pressure on the appellant and his brother by lodging the FIR. Under the threat of criminal prosecution, may be the appellant would have tried to sort out and settle the dispute by shelving out some money."

Charge sheet in this case has been filed on 20.4.2026 and cognizance thereon has already been taken on 30.4.2026. Further custodial interrogation of the applicant is no more required. Applicant has 09 cases of criminal antecedent, which have 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. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

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

Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, aforesaid law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court, 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, Rama Yadav, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties 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