Sageer v. State of U.P., whereby this Court granted bail to the above named three

1. Heard Shri Shailendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Dr. Surendra Singh, learned AGA for the State and Shri Yogeshwar Sharan Srivastava holding brief of Shri Anuj Dayal, learned counsel for the informant.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit explaining criminal history of five cases of the present applicant, the same is taken on record.

3. Shri Yogeshwar Sharan Srivastava has filed counter affidavit, which is taken on record.

4. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Ali Ahmad @ Badkan) is languishing in jail since 07.05.2025 in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 58/2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 103(1), 61(2), 3(5), 351(3), 109 of B.N.S., Police Station Hujoorpur, District Bahraich.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story. The attention of this Court has been drawn towards the FIR wherein general allegation of assault and beating mercilessly through sharp edged weapon and country made pistol has been attributed to 12 named accused persons and 4 to 5 unknown accused persons.

6. At this stage learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court towards the Annexure No. 20, which are bail the orders dated 9.5.2025 In Re: Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4024 of 2025, Asraf Vs. State of U.P., order dated 12.5.2025 In Re: Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 4066 of 2025, Abrar Vs. State of U.P. and order dated 29.5.2025 In Re: Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 4860 of 2025, Sageer Vs. State of U.P., whereby this Court granted bail to the above named three accused persons. Besides vide order dated 27.6.2025, this Court granted bail to the co-accused In Re: Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 5741 of 2025, Aftab Vs. State of U.P.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has also stated that another co-accused Banne and Suleman @ Raju have been granted bail, vide order dated 4.7.2025 In Re: Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 5828 of 2025, Banne Vs. State of U.P. and order dated 8.7.2025 In Re: Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 5895 of 2025, Suleman @ Raju Vs. State of U.P.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the role of the present applicant as has been attributed in the prosecution story is identically similar to others co-accused who have been granted bail, as argued above. Therefore on the basis of principle of parity the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

9. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant if released on bail he shall abide by all the terms and conditions and he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial but per contra Dr. Surendra Singh, learned AGA and Shri Yogeshwar Sharan Srivastava have vehemently opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that all accused persons have mercilessly beaten the deceased and other persons having sharp edged weapon and country made pistol in their hands and all the co-accused persons who are named, are dead criminals, therefore their bail applications have been rejected. Though, so far as the fact that the aforesaid co- accused persons have been granted bail by this Court, this fact has not been disputed.

10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that criminal history of five cases against the present applicant has been explained in the supplementary affidavit dated 7.7.2025; Similarly situated persons have been granted bail by this Court, the charge-sheet in this case has been filed; the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

10. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant (Ali Ahmad @ Badkan) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:- (i) 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. 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) 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 B.N.S.S., 2023 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/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) 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., 2023. 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. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

12. Before parting with, it is expected that the trial shall be concluded with expedition in terms of Section 309 Cr.P.C./346 B.N.S.S. Further, the learned trial court may take all coercive measures, as per law, if either of the parties do not co-operate in the trial proceedings properly. . (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Muk MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Shri Shailendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Dr. Surendra Singh, learned AGA for the State and Shri Yogeshwar Sharan Srivastava holding brief of Shri Anuj Dayal, learned counsel for the informant.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit explaining criminal history of five cases of the present applicant, the same is taken on record.

3. Shri Yogeshwar Sharan Srivastava has filed counter affidavit, which is taken on record.

4. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Ali Ahmad @ Badkan) is languishing in jail since 07.05.2025 in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 58/2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 103(1), 61(2), 3(5), 351(3), 109 of B.N.S., Police Station Hujoorpur, District Bahraich.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story. The attention of this Court has been drawn towards the FIR wherein general allegation of assault and beating mercilessly through sharp edged weapon and country made pistol has been attributed to 12 named accused persons and 4 to 5 unknown accused persons.

6. At this stage learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court towards the Annexure No. 20, which are bail the orders dated 9.5.2025 In Re: Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4024 of 2025, Asraf Vs. State of U.P., order dated 12.5.2025 In Re: Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 4066 of 2025, Abrar Vs. State of U.P. and order dated 29.5.2025 In Re: Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 4860 of 2025, Sageer Vs. State of U.P., whereby this Court granted bail to the above named three accused persons. Besides vide order dated 27.6.2025, this Court granted bail to the co-accused In Re: Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 5741 of 2025, Aftab Vs. State of U.P.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has also stated that another co-accused Banne and Suleman @ Raju have been granted bail, vide order dated 4.7.2025 In Re: Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 5828 of 2025, Banne Vs. State of U.P. and order dated 8.7.2025 In Re: Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 5895 of 2025, Suleman @ Raju Vs. State of U.P.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the role of the present applicant as has been attributed in the prosecution story is identically similar to others co-accused who have been granted bail, as argued above. Therefore on the basis of principle of parity the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

9. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant if released on bail he shall abide by all the terms and conditions and he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial but per contra Dr. Surendra Singh, learned AGA and Shri Yogeshwar Sharan Srivastava have vehemently opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that all accused persons have mercilessly beaten the deceased and other persons having sharp edged weapon and country made pistol in their hands and all the co-accused persons who are named, are dead criminals, therefore their bail applications have been rejected. Though, so far as the fact that the aforesaid co- accused persons have been granted bail by this Court, this fact has not been disputed.

10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that criminal history of five cases against the present applicant has been explained in the supplementary affidavit dated 7.7.2025; Similarly situated persons have been granted bail by this Court, the charge-sheet in this case has been filed; the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

10. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant (Ali Ahmad @ Badkan) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:- (i) 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. 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) 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 B.N.S.S., 2023 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/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) 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., 2023. 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. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

12. Before parting with, it is expected that the trial shall be concluded with expedition in terms of Section 309 Cr.P.C./346 B.N.S.S. Further, the learned trial court may take all coercive measures, as per law, if either of the parties do not co-operate in the trial proceedings properly. . (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Muk MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench