Tejan Yadav v. State of U.P

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31997 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Ajay Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer and perused the record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Sessions Trial No. 13 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime No. 31 of 2015, under Sections 8/20 of NDPS Act, Police Station - Jalalpur, District - Jaunpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶4It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Vijay Shankar Ojha, has already been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 3.6.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15377 of 2025. It is further submitted that since the case of the applicant is at par to the co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

¶5Learned counsel has also stated that criminal history assigned to the applicant has been explained in the affidavit. The applicant is languishing in jail since 02.04.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.

¶6The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned State Law Officer. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Yadav, Akhilesh Singh, Shivam Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Tejan Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)

¶7In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail.

¶8Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, evidence on record, pending trial and also considering the bail order of co-accused, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶9Let the applicant-Tejan Yadav, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.

ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶10In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶11It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 26, 2025 Siddhant BAIL No. 31997 of 2025 (Krishan Pahal,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad