Abdul Majid Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119586

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17803 of 2025

Applicant :- Abdul Majid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Dubey,Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- Raghuvansh Misra,G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Second Supplementary Affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anil Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the StateRespondent and perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been moved on behalf of accusedapplicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 247 of 2024, 109, 103, 61(2), 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 7 of Criminal Law (Amendment) Act and Sections 3/25/27 of Arms Act, Police Station Azeemnagar, District Rampur.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accusedapplicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case crime number. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the FIR has been registered with some delay of which no satisfactory explanation has been submitted. The Police has shown false recovery memo against the applicant. He further submits that there is no independent witness of the alleged incident. He submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is not required any custodial interrogation. He further submits that the medical report does not corroborate with the version of FIR. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that PW-1 namely Akbar Ali (first informant) and PW-2 namely Babbu (injured) have turned hostile during the trial. In support of his contention, learned counsel has annexed the copy of statement of PW-1 and PW-2, as Annexure No. SA-1 & SA-2. The applicant has criminal antecedent of seven cases, which has been explained in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application.

¶10

He further submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.09.2024 and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, the bail has been prayed for.

¶11

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail, but could not dispute the above submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Considering all those facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima-facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the accused-applicant, Abdul Majid, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶15

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶16

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶17

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶18

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶19

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 22.7.2025 pks

¶21

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

Abdul Majid v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Majid 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