Rashid @ Mohd. Rashid Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home ) Lko.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10581 of 2025

Rashid @ Mohd. Rashid

.....Applicant(s) Versus State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home ) Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Uma Kant Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 15

¶6

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the gang chart, only 1 case has been shown against the applicant and in that case, the applicant has been enlarged on bail, the bail order is annexed as Annexure no. 3 to the bail application. Apart from the said case, the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 13.09.2025.

¶9

It is also submitted that the applicant is ready to furnish an undertaking in terms of requirement of Section 19(4)(b) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.

¶10

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the fact that on the basis of single case in the gang chart the applicant has been implicated in the present case and the fact that apart from the said case in the gang chart, the applicant has no previous history and he is languishing in jail since 13.09.2025 and without expressing any opinion on the

¶13

BAIL No. 10581 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶16

Let the applicant- Rashid @ Mohd Rashid, involved in Case Crime No. 334/2025, under Sections 2(b)(i)/(3) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Phardhan, District Lakhimpur Kheri 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶17

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶19

(iii) 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.

¶20

(iv) 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.

¶21

(v) The applicant shall also file an undertaking in terms of requirement of Section 19(4)(b) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 that he will not indulge in any case or misuse the liberty of bail.

¶22

(vi) 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 269 B.N.S.

¶23

(vii) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S 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 209 B.N.S.

¶24

BAIL No. 10581 of 2025

¶25

3

¶26

8. The bail application is allowed accordingly.

¶27

October 31, 2025 DiVYa

¶28

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rashid @ Mohd. Rashid v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home ) Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rashid @ Mohd. Rashid v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (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

Vimal Kumar Pandey @ Bose Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home U.P. Lko.

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

Awadhesh Kumar Omar Vs State of U.P. Thru.Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. Lko. and Another

Bharat Kumar Mishra and 127 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Ayush Lko. and 3 Others

Rashid @ Mohd. Rashid vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home ) Lko.

Dharmendra Madhesiya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.