VIPIN YADAV vs STATE OF U.P. Advocate - G.A. — BAIL/8457/2026

Disposed: -- on 19th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UPHC011315392026

Filing Number

BAIL/

Filing Date

26-Feb-2026

Registration No

BAIL/8457/2026

Registration Date

09-Mar-2026

Judge

Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal

Coram

Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

APPLICATION ( 401500 )

Sub-Category

U/s 439 Cr.P.C. for bail (minor) ( 7 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Misc.

Decision Date

19-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

--

Last updated 30-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.VIPIN YADAV

    Adv. SHYAM MOHAN SINGH,MANEESH KUMAR SINGH,MANEESH KUMAR SINGH, ,MANEESH KUMAR SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P. Advocate - G.A.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-Mar-2026

    Arun Kumar Singh DeshwalView PDF

    Summary of BAIL/8457/2026 - Vipin Yadav v. State of U.P. The Allahabad High Court granted bail to Vipin Yadav, accused in a snatching case under BNS Sections 309(4), 352, 351(3), 317(2), and 117(2). The court found that the applicant was not named in the original FIR, arrested 45 days later without incriminating evidence except his motorcycle (based on co-accused's statement), and was not identified by the first informant. The court imposed standard bail conditions including non-tampering with evidence, cooperation in trial proceedings, and abstention from further criminal activity. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-Mar-2026

    —

    Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal

  4. 26-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. BAIL/8457/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of BAIL/8457/2026 - Vipin Yadav v. State of U.P. The Allahabad High Court granted bail to Vipin Yadav, accused in a snatching case under BNS Sections 309(4), 352, 351(3), 317(2), and 117(2). The court found that the applicant was not named in the original FIR, arrested 45 days later without incriminating evidence except his motorcycle (based on co-accused's statement), and was not identified by the first informant. The court imposed standard bail conditions including non-tampering with evidence, cooperation in trial proceedings, and abstention from further criminal activity. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case