Allowed

Mohd. Umar v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko.

Allahabad HC28 Nov 2025/2262/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application filed by Mohd. Umar. Relying on parity with a co-accord granted bail earlier, the court held the applicant entitled to release on a personal bond with two sureties given his no criminal history despite opposing arguments by the AGA.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond with two sureties of Rs. 20,000 each subject to conditions of attending hearings and not tampering with evidence.

Mohd. Umar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2262 of 2025

Mohd. Umar

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko.

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Punit Kumar Shukla, Mohammad Salim Khan, Narendra Gupta, Priyanka Singh, Ruchi Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 12

¶9

HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.

¶10

1. Heard Shri Punit Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶11

2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No. 428 of 2024 under sections 103(1), 352, 3(5) BNS, P.S. Pisawan, District Sitapur.

¶12

3. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that co accused Mohd. Raza with similar allegations has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 26.11.2025 passed in Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 11607 of 2025.

¶13

4. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶14

5. Considering the facts and circumstances and adopting the same reasoning, however, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the applicant who is in jail since 26.11.2024 and has no criminal history is entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶15

6. Let the applicant Mohd Umar be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

¶16

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶17

BAIL No. 2262 of 2025

¶18

¶19

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶20

(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

(Pankaj Bhatia,J.)

¶22

November 28, 2025

¶23

J. K. Dinkar

¶24

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

Mohd. Umar v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Umar v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vindeshwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Garibe Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Nanku Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Manichandra Chauhan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Umesh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Hariom Vs the State of U.P., Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.