Saddam Ansari vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:66036

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12822 of 2025

Applicant :- Saddam Ansari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Juned Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Amendment application filed in Court today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶8

Heard Sri Juned Alam, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶9

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 31 of 2025, under Sections 64(1), 87 B.N.S., Police Station Tarya Sujan, District Kushinagar, during the pendency of trial.

¶10

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have abducted the daughter of the informant on 02.02.2025.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no time of offence is mentioned in the FIR. FIR is delayed by about one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is major aged about 24 years old and as such, she is major.

¶12

It has been further stated that the matter of consensual relationship has been converted into a criminal case by the informant. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 08.02.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail

¶14

application.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration that it is a matter of consensual relationship 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 .

¶16

Let the applicant- Saddam Ansari, 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.

¶17

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

¶18

(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 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.

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 29.4.2025 Priya

¶22

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Saddam Ansari v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saddam Ansari 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sachin Alias Pushpendra vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Niyaj vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anubhav vs State of U.P.

Padam Pandey Alias Padhamdhar vs State of U.P.

Tushar Thakur Alias Kartik vs State of U.P.

Shivbabu vs State of U.P. and 3 Others