Imran vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home U.P.(Lucknow)

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:23106

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1214 of 2025

Applicant :- Imran Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Principal Secretary Home U.P.(Lucknow) Counsel for Applicant :- Mashaluddin Shah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Mashaluddin Shah, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.531 of 2024, under Section 103 (1), 238, 61(1) (a) BNS, Police Station Ramgarh, District Firozabad, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged against three accused (nonapplicant) and according to the FIR co-accused Aasiya the wife of the brother of the informant was having illicit relationship with coaccused Salman Beg and she along with him and her sister committed his murder.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits it is a case of circumstantial evidence and applicant was not named in the FIR and during investigation he has been made accused in the present matter through the statement of co-accused with the aid of section 61 BNS.

¶10

He further submits as per prosecution after committing the murder of the deceased the named accused persons used the tempo of the applicant.

¶11

He further submits, however entire allegation levelled against applicant is false but even if it is accepted it cannot be said that applicant also involved in the present matter. He next submits there is no cogent evidence of conspiracy against the applicant.

¶12

He further submits applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 04.09.2024.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶14

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶15

It is a case of circumstantial evidence and during investigation applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the ground that named accused persons used his tempo after committing the murder and therefore it appears with the aid of Section 61 BNS he has been made accused in the present matter but considering the fact of the case this court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that even there is no congent evidence of conspiracy against the applicant.

¶16

Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 04.09.2024.

¶17

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶19

Let the applicant- Imran, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶24

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to

¶25

the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶26

Order Date :- 18.2.2025 Neeraj

¶27

Digitally signed by :- NEERAJ KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Imran v. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home U.P.(Lucknow)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Imran v. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home U.P.(Lucknow)

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

Similar cases

Ashish vs State of U.P.

Ram Naresh Sahu vs State of U.P.

Ibrahim Ali vs State of U.P.

Mahesh Prasad Rajak vs State of U.P.

Rajaram vs State of U.P.

Kamaluddin Alias Kamal vs State of U.P.