Allahabad High Court
BAIL/31551/2026 of SATYAJEET YADAV @ VIRAT SINGH Vs STATE OF U.P. on 7 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31551 of 2026 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J. 1. Heard Sri Devendra Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the accused- applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31551 of 2026
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
2
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Sri Devendra Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the accused- applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused- Satyajeet Yadav @ Virat Singh to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 182 of 2026, under Sections 178, 179, 180, 181 BNS, P.S.- Alinagar, District- Chandauli, during the pendency of trial.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the accused-applicant that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated by the police in F.I.R. dated 23.03.2026 lodged against the accused/applicant and other co-accused with the allegation that the accused/applicant was printing the counterfeit currency notes through printers in the house of Poonam Pandey. It is the contention of learned counsel that initially the accused applicant and his friend were apprehended by the police with counterfeit currency notes. It is further contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of disclosure statement. The printers recovered from the place of incident have not been sent to Forensic Science Laboratory. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is a tenant of the premises owned by Poonam Pandey. The charge sheet is submitted and the land lady of the premises has not been examined. The entire process of arrest and recovery has been in absence of independent witness. The applicant is in jail since 22.03.2026. The applicant seeks to be released on bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. for State has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant, Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Devendra Mani Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Satyajeet Yadav @ Virat Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)
but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considered the arrest and recovery has been made in the absence of independent witness and prima facie there is no technical report of the printer, the accused/applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
8. The accused/applicant 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 court concerned in view of observation made by the Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re [(2024)10SCC 685].
9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and speedy disposal. September 8, 2026 Sharad/- BAIL No. 31551 of 2026 2 (Avnish Saxena,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad