Mohammad Akbar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10545 of 2025

¶3

Mohammad Akbar

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.	Deptt. Of Home Lko	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ghulam Mohammad Kamil, Affan	Mohammad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 16

¶7

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

¶9

The present application has been filed by the applicant- Mohd. Akbar seeking bail in FIR/Case Crime No.130 of 2025, under Sections 191 (2), 115 (2), 352, 351 (3) & 105 BNS 2023, police station – Kotwali Tanda, District – Ambedkar Nagar.

¶10

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the FIR has been lodged against seven accused persons making allegations of assault against all the accused and there is no specific role assigned to the applicant in the FIR, however, on the confessional statement of the applicant stick has been recovered on his pointing out.

¶11

It has been submitted that other six co-accused have already been granted bail by co-ordinate benches of this Court. He has further submitted that it is case of 105 BNS and there is no intention to kill the deceased rather the incident took place out of sudden provocation and the complainant had attributed role of assault against all the accused by assigning general role.

¶12

He has submitted that confessional statement has no evidentiary value and the applicant has also no criminal history. Applicant is in jail since 10.5.2025.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of bail but could not dispute the fact that all the 6 co- accused have been grant bail.

¶14

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and the argument that all the other co-accused persons have been granted bail and the argument that confessional statement of the accused has no evidentiary value and without entering into the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled to

¶15

BAIL No. 10545 of 2025

¶16

2

¶17

be released on bail.

¶18

Let applicant – Mohammad Akbar be released on bail in the above case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶19

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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.

¶20

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

(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 cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.

¶23

November 3, 2025 mks

¶24

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- MANISH SAXENA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohammad Akbar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Akbar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shekhar Sandal Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Vikash Yadav (Regional Inspector) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addt. Chief. Secy. Prin. Secy. Home. Sachivalaya and Another

Ishwar Sahay and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Subhash Singh and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Alka Singh @ Neha Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

M/S Kalpana Industries Thru. Its Authorized Representative Rajiv Kumar Vs M/S K.D. Overseas Thru. Its Manager Competent Officer Haryana and 3 Others