Allahabad High Court

learned counsel for the accused applicant are taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State- respondents and perused the record.

3. This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant Sabir Azam seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.145 of 2025, under Sections 318(3), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 3(5) B.N.S., 17 of the Citizenship Act and 14A of the Foreigners Act, Police Station- Patherwa, District- Kushinagar.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused-applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. Applicant is languishing in jail since 11.6.2025. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is submitted that only accused Seraj-ul-haq pak citizen is named in the FIR and Government of India has cancelled his L.T.V. Visa. It is further submitted that accused applicant is not involved in creation of any forged document and aadhar card, pan card are not forged documents. It is argued that the name of the accused applicant came into light during the course of investigation on the basis of statement of main accused Seraj-ul- haq and the applicant is citizen of India each and every person of the locality has no idea that accused Seraj-ul-haq is an outsider and this fact came into knowledge of the accused applicant and others when accused Seraj-ul-haq was arrested. It is further argued that the applicant is fully authorized to submit an application form on the portal of UIDAB (Unique Independent 2 BAIL No. 25051 of 2025 Authority of India) for issuance of aadhar card of any person, who provide all the documents and at the relevant time named accused Seraj-ul-haq came at centre of the applicant and provided all requisite documents and thereafter the applicant submitted an application form on the concerned portal i.e. UIDAB and after verification of the document, the concerned authority has issued an aadhar card in the name of the named accused Seraj-ul-haq. It is contended that the applicant has no equipment for preparation of aadhar card and pan card nor he is doing such type of act and no any kind of objectionable thing has been recovered from the possession of the accused applicant. It is lastly submitted that the conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long; accused applicant has no criminal history and there is no likelihood of accused applicant fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

5. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the accused applicant is involved in creation of forged documents related to main accused Seraj-ul-haq pak citizen. He further submits that the accused Seraj-ul-haq has been residing in India since 1954; his passport has also expired and his is living in India illegally but he is not able to explain as to what forged documents has been prepared by the accused applicant.

6. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the paragraph no.53 of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024, (SC) LawSuit 677 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that:- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek 3 BAIL No. 25051 of 2025 any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 BNS. (iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of BNSS is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC/209 of BNS. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

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

8. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. October 6, 2025 RA (Santosh Rai,J.)

learned counsel for the accused applicant are taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State- respondents and perused the record.

3. This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant Sabir Azam seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.145 of 2025, under Sections 318(3), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 3(5) B.N.S., 17 of the Citizenship Act and 14A of the Foreigners Act, Police Station- Patherwa, District- Kushinagar.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused-applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. Applicant is languishing in jail since 11.6.2025. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is submitted that only accused Seraj-ul-haq pak citizen is named in the FIR and Government of India has cancelled his L.T.V. Visa. It is further submitted that accused applicant is not involved in creation of any forged document and aadhar card, pan card are not forged documents. It is argued that the name of the accused applicant came into light during the course of investigation on the basis of statement of main accused Seraj-ul- haq and the applicant is citizen of India each and every person of the locality has no idea that accused Seraj-ul-haq is an outsider and this fact came into knowledge of the accused applicant and others when accused Seraj-ul-haq was arrested. It is further argued that the applicant is fully authorized to submit an application form on the portal of UIDAB (Unique Independent 2 BAIL No. 25051 of 2025 Authority of India) for issuance of aadhar card of any person, who provide all the documents and at the relevant time named accused Seraj-ul-haq came at centre of the applicant and provided all requisite documents and thereafter the applicant submitted an application form on the concerned portal i.e. UIDAB and after verification of the document, the concerned authority has issued an aadhar card in the name of the named accused Seraj-ul-haq. It is contended that the applicant has no equipment for preparation of aadhar card and pan card nor he is doing such type of act and no any kind of objectionable thing has been recovered from the possession of the accused applicant. It is lastly submitted that the conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long; accused applicant has no criminal history and there is no likelihood of accused applicant fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

5. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the accused applicant is involved in creation of forged documents related to main accused Seraj-ul-haq pak citizen. He further submits that the accused Seraj-ul-haq has been residing in India since 1954; his passport has also expired and his is living in India illegally but he is not able to explain as to what forged documents has been prepared by the accused applicant.

6. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the paragraph no.53 of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024, (SC) LawSuit 677 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that:- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek 3 BAIL No. 25051 of 2025 any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 BNS. (iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of BNSS is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC/209 of BNS. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

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

8. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. October 6, 2025 RA (Santosh Rai,J.)