Ajjan Husain Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:43408

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13026 of 2024

Applicant :- Ajjan Husain Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shahid Raza,Asrar Ahmad Khan,Sunil Kumar Maurya

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Gyan Prakash Panday

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

Heard Shri Shikhar Gupta, Advocate holding brief of learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim has not taken the name of the applicant in her statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS. No test identification parade has been conducted. There is no public witness to the alleged recovery. The victim has been examined before the trial court. There is no chance of tampering the evidence. Till date, only one prosecution witness could be examined. The trial is going on at a snail's pace and the same is not likely to be concluded in the near future.

¶9

It is further submitted that the alleged offences are punishable up to 7 years. The applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 4.10.2024. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record, the statements of the victim under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS so also the fact that the alleged offences are punishable up to 7 years; the applicant has no criminal history; he is languishing in jail since 4.10.2024; till date, only one prosecution witness could be examined; the trial is not likely to be concluded in the near future and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant- Ajjan Husain involved in Case Crime No. 175 of 2024, under Sections 76, 351(2) of B.N.S. & Sections 9U, 9M, 10 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Saadatganj, DistrictLucknow, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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 in accordance with law.

¶19

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. 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 209 of B.N.S.

¶20

Order Date :- 28.7.2025 Shravan

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ajjan Husain v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajjan Husain v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

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

Junaid Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Himanshu Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Harikesh Pandey @ Harikesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Raj Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Jagdish Mahawat Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.