Mohammad Ali vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:21831

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1830 of 2025

Applicant :- Mohammad Ali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satya Narayan Gupta,Yogendra Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Yogendra Pal Singh, 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. 13 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 323, 306, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mundali, District Meerut, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that initially FIR of the present case was lodged under section 302 IPC but when it was found that deceased i.e. wife of the applicant committed suicide then case was converted under section 306 IPC.

¶9

He further submitted that however, applicant is husband of the deceased but on the basis of false allegation of torture and abetment, he has been made accused in the present matter.

¶10

He further submitted that there is no cogent evidence of abetment against the applicant.

¶11

He further submitted that deceased died on 4.7.2023 but FIR of the present case was lodged on 23.1.2024 i.e. after six months through an application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. and even application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. moved on 13.12.2023 i.e. after five months and this inordinate delay in lodging the FIR, itself suggests that it is based on false and frivolous facts.

¶12

He further submitted that due to some domestic dispute and family settlement of the property, financial condition of the applicant became quite bad and only due to this reason his wife

¶13

committed suicide.

¶14

He further submitted that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 4.10.2024.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

However, applicant is husband of the deceased and as per allegation made in the FIR he alongwith his family members committed her murder but it reflects that during investigation when it was found that actually deceased committed suicide then case was converted under section 306 IPC.

¶18

Further, FIR of the present case was lodged after six months through an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and even application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved after five months and therefore, there is inordinate delay in lodging the FIR.

¶19

Further, cause of suicide disclosed by learned counsel for the applicant during the course of argument, cannot be completely brushed aside, at this stage.

¶20

Further, it appears, except bold and verbal allegations, there is no cogent evidence of abetment against the applicant.

¶21

Further, applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 4.10.2024.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

Let the applicant- Mohammad Ali, 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:-

¶25

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

¶26

(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.

¶27

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

¶28

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.

¶29

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to 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.

¶30

Order Date :- 14.2.2025

¶31

Ankita

¶32

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohammad Ali v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Ali 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

Ganesh Kumar vs State of U.P.

Kanhaiya vs State of U.P.

Teeku Kushwah vs State of U.P.

Harun vs State of U.P.

Raghvendra Kumar vs State of U.P.

Babu Kushwaha vs State of U.P.