Azad Ahmad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11411 of 2024

Azad Ahmad

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kalika Prasad Pandey, Ashutosh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Avikshit Mishra

¶7

Court No. - 12

¶8

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶9

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

¶10

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.252 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 333, 74, 64 of BNS, P.S. Baghrai, District Pratapgarh.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has falsely been implicated in this case. The victim is 35 years old. In the prosecution case improvement has been made at every stage. He submits that there is a civil suit pending between the victim as well as applicant before the court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kunda, Pratapgarh. It is submitted that no allegation of rape has been made by the victim in the F.I.R. or in the statement under Section 180 BNSS however, while making improvement for the first time allegation of rape has been made by the victim in the statement under Section 183 BNSS. Internal medical examination has been refused by the victim. Applicant has explained the criminal history in paragraph 4 of the supplementary affidavit. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 17.08.2024.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer and has submitted that charge-sheet has been filed in this case.

¶13

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.08.2024, applicant has explained the criminal history in paragraph 4 of the supplementary affidavit, medical has been refused by the victim and without

¶14

BAIL No. 11411 of 2024

¶15

2

¶16

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

¶17

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶18

Let the applicant Azad Ahmad be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

(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.

¶22

(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.

¶23

(v) 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 Panel Code (now Section 269 of BNS).

¶24

(vi) 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. (now Section 84 BNSS) 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 Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS).

¶25

September 12, 2025 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶26

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶27

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

Azad Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Azad Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

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

Monu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vipul Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Nisar Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt.

Karan and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sajan @ Ram Sanehi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Pravesh Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.