Mohd. Zuber vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:4960

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 114 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd. Zuber Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Of U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhupendra Nath Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.538 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 351(3), 117(2), 309(6) and 109(1) BNS 2023, P.S. Para, District Lucknow West (Commissionerate Lucknow).

¶8

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that role of the applicant is only of putting pistol over the chest of the victim and no fire was opened by him. He added that as per the injury report also, there is no injury inflicted by the gun shot. He further added that there is no independent public witness of the incident and there are six cases criminal history, which has been explained and the applicant is languishing in jail since 21.11.2024 and in case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate in the trial proceedings.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the applicant is involved in committing the aforesaid offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that role of the applicant is only of putting pistol over the chest of the victim and no fire was opened by him; as per the injury report also, there is no injury inflicted by the gun shot; there is no independent public witness of the incident; there are six cases criminal history, which has been explained; the applicant is languishing in jail since 21.11.2024; and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if granted and would co-operate in the trial

¶11

proceedings.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶13

Let the applicant Mohd. Zuber involved in the aforementioned crime 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:-

¶14

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶15

(2) 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. He 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;

¶16

(3) 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.; and

¶17

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶19

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶20

Order Date :- 24.1.2025/Ram Murti

¶21

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Zuber v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Zuber v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. 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

Mahendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko

Ritesh Lodhi @ Bablu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Sushimta Shahi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Jamuna Prasad Gangwar and 12 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Dairy Development Lko and 2 Others

Smt. Karmdani vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Himanshu Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.