Shahnawaz vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:58594

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12060 of 2025

Applicant :- Shahnawaz Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashwani Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.33 of 2025, under Sections 89, 64(1) B.N.S., Police Station Binauli, District Baghpat, during the pendency of trial.

¶9

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have established corporeal relationship with the victim by taking her to agricultural field several times and impregnated her. The said pregnancy was revealed to the victim, as such, the FIR was instituted on 01.02.2025.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegations are per se false. It is true that the victim was impregnated and she had given birth to a dead baby girl, but the said fact does not corroborate the FIR as it is stated that she was pregnant by about 3 months only.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the victim is major aged about 18-19 years old as per FIR and as per school certificate, she was more than 21 years old. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 03.02.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶13

The Supreme Court in the case of Niranjan Singh and another vs. Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and Others, AIR 1980 SC 785 has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself.

¶14

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant- Shahnawaz , who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶16

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. 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 him in accordance with law.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶20

Order Date :- 21.4.2025 (Ravi Kant)

¶21

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶22

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shahnawaz v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahnawaz v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Awadhesh Kumar Kurmi vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pradeep vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Santosh Kumar Alias Nandu vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rishikesh Verma vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nikhil @ Nikil vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jahangir Khan vs State of U.P. and 3 Others