Mohd. Faisal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:50579

Court No. - 32

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 368 of 2024

Applicant :- Mohd. Faisal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mayank Pandey,Akhilesha Nand Pandey,Ravi Kant,Shamshad Ahmad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶6

1. Case has been taken up through video conferencing.

¶7

2. As per office report dated 08.07.2024, notice has been served upon opposite party no.2, however, none has appeared on his behalf to press the bail application.

¶8

3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rakesh Singh,learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

4. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 177 of 2023 under Sections 302, 279, 354 IPC read with Section 7/8 Prevention of Children from Sexual Offence Act, Police Station Haswar, District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶10

5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that case of the applicant is covered with the case of coaccused Farahin alias Mod. Farahim, who has been granted bail by coordinate Bench this Court vide order dated 31.05.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.15012 of 2023. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that he has also taken the same grounds which have taken in the case of co-accused Farahin alias Mohd. Farahim and the case of the applicant is at par with the aforesaid co-accused thus, the applicant may also be granted bail on the ground of parity. He has also explained the criminal history of one case in the supplementary affidavit.The applicant is in jail since 02.12.2023.

¶11

6. Learned A.G.A. though opposed the prayer for bail but

¶12

could not dispute the fact that the case of the applicant is at par with the case of co-accused Farahin alias Mohd. Farahim.

¶13

7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and after hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking into overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as the argument that case of the applicant is at par with the case of co-accused Farahin alias Mohd. Farahim, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.

¶14

8. The bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶15

9. Let applicant, namely, Mohd. Faisal , be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(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. 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(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. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient

¶20

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.

¶21

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The Trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything in this order.

¶22

(Brij Raj Singh, J.)

¶23

Order Date :- 25.7.2024 dk/

¶24

Digitally signed by :- DEVENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Faisal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Faisal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pradeep Kumar Alias Annu Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Vimal Kumar Nishad @ Maalu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Kaushar Husain Vs Union of India (N.C.B.) Lko.

Smt. Anita Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Mustak @ Goli Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko.

Kurkut Alias Jibreel Khan Alias Jibrail vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko