High Court · 2025

Sri Nouphil Ahmad, Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant and the same is taken on record. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant bail application on behalf of applicant nos. 2 to 6 with liberty to file a fresh bail application on their behalf. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the contention aforesaid. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the instant bail application is hereby dismissed on behalf of the applicant nos. 2 to 6, namely, Azad, Nadeem, Imran Ali, Shakim & Monu alias Faizan. Heard learned counsel for the applicant,Sri Nouhil Ahmad, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 0264 of 2024, under sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109(1), 324(V), 118(1), 115(2), 352, 74, 333, 351(3) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, Police Station-Bangarmau, District-Unnao. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that the present applicant is a political activist and social worker and presently, is employed in RDS Group of School as Coordinator for past 4 years. He next added that the applicant is not named in the first information report and certain other co-accused persons have been named in the first information report lodged by the whereas the fact remains that police, subsequently, the first information report was lodged by one of the person of the village and due to anonymity, the applicant has been named and thus, there is a material discrepancy in naming the present applicant in two first information reports. He submits that there is no cogent piece of evidence and due to anonymity, his name has placed in the first information report. He added that as soon as this fact came into the knowledge of the applicant that he is wanted in the case, he had surrendered before the trial court and thus, submission is that the applicant will cooperate in the trial proceedings and will never jump the conditions of bail, if the same is granted. He further submits that there is no previous criminal antecedent of the applicant and he is languishing in jail since 02-01-2024. He added that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Further submitted that the identically situated co- accused namely, Shubham Mishra, has already been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 25-10-2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11405 of 2024 and the applicant is seeking parity of the same. Per contra, Sri Nouphil Ahmad,learned counsel appearing for the complainant has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the first information report lodged by one of the complainant namely, Alauddin and he has been seen in the CCTV Footage at the spot and he is very well involved in committing the offence and thus, he is not entitled for any relief, but, he could not dispute the fact that the identically situated co-accused named above, has already been enlarged on bail by this court. Learned AGA appearing for the State has also supported the version of the counsel for the complainant and submits that the applicant is involved in committing offence and there are ample evidences against him and therefore, he is not entitled for bail. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is not named in the first information report and subsequently, the first information report was lodged by one, Alauddin of the same village and as per the argument of the learned counsel for the applicant the present applicant is named in that first information report. At this juncture, it seems that there are discrepancies in naming the present applicant in the two first information reports, one lodged by the police and the other lodged by the private person. This court has noticed the fact that the applicant himself has surrendered before the trial and therefore, there is no probability that the applicant will flee away from the trial proceedings and further the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant will not cooperate in the investigation proceedings; the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 02-01-2024 coupled with the fact that the applicant has has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant-Noor Alam, involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) 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.; (4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 21.1.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sri Nouphil Ahmad, Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant and the same is taken on record. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant bail application on behalf of applicant nos. 2 to 6 with liberty to file a fresh bail application on their behalf. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the contention aforesaid. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the instant bail application is hereby dismissed on behalf of the applicant nos. 2 to 6, namely, Azad, Nadeem, Imran Ali, Shakim & Monu alias Faizan. Heard learned counsel for the applicant,Sri Nouhil Ahmad, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 0264 of 2024, under sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109(1), 324(V), 118(1), 115(2), 352, 74, 333, 351(3) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, Police Station-Bangarmau, District-Unnao. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that the present applicant is a political activist and social worker and presently, is employed in RDS Group of School as Coordinator for past 4 years. He next added that the applicant is not named in the first information report and certain other co-accused persons have been named in the first information report lodged by the whereas the fact remains that police, subsequently, the first information report was lodged by one of the person of the village and due to anonymity, the applicant has been named and thus, there is a material discrepancy in naming the present applicant in two first information reports. He submits that there is no cogent piece of evidence and due to anonymity, his name has placed in the first information report. He added that as soon as this fact came into the knowledge of the applicant that he is wanted in the case, he had surrendered before the trial court and thus, submission is that the applicant will cooperate in the trial proceedings and will never jump the conditions of bail, if the same is granted. He further submits that there is no previous criminal antecedent of the applicant and he is languishing in jail since 02-01-2024. He added that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Further submitted that the identically situated co- accused namely, Shubham Mishra, has already been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 25-10-2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11405 of 2024 and the applicant is seeking parity of the same. Per contra, Sri Nouphil Ahmad,learned counsel appearing for the complainant has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the first information report lodged by one of the complainant namely, Alauddin and he has been seen in the CCTV Footage at the spot and he is very well involved in committing the offence and thus, he is not entitled for any relief, but, he could not dispute the fact that the identically situated co-accused named above, has already been enlarged on bail by this court. Learned AGA appearing for the State has also supported the version of the counsel for the complainant and submits that the applicant is involved in committing offence and there are ample evidences against him and therefore, he is not entitled for bail. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is not named in the first information report and subsequently, the first information report was lodged by one, Alauddin of the same village and as per the argument of the learned counsel for the applicant the present applicant is named in that first information report. At this juncture, it seems that there are discrepancies in naming the present applicant in the two first information reports, one lodged by the police and the other lodged by the private person. This court has noticed the fact that the applicant himself has surrendered before the trial and therefore, there is no probability that the applicant will flee away from the trial proceedings and further the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant will not cooperate in the investigation proceedings; the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 02-01-2024 coupled with the fact that the applicant has has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant-Noor Alam, involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) 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.; (4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 21.1.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench