Allowed¶17

Faeem v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Jul 2025BAIL/19281/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail ALLOWED. CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 19281 of 2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:119589; Faeem v. State of U.P.; Justice Krishan Pahal; Order Date 22.7.2025. Offences: Sections 109(1), 3(5) BNS; Sections 3/25/27 Arms Act; Sections 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act; Case Crime No. 110 of 2025, P.S. Najibabad, District Bijnor; alleged recovery of 45 kg beef; custody since 03.04.2025; no criminal history; Prabhakar Tewari v. State of U.P., (2020) 11 SCC 648 relied on; conditions: no tampering with evidence, no witness intimidation, appearance before trial court.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Faeem on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to stated conditions; sureties to be verified before issuance of the release order. ¶17

Faeem Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Faeem, arraigned in Case Crime No. 110 of 2025 (P.S. Najibabad, District Bijnor) under Sections 109(1), 3(5) BNS, Sections 3/25/27 Arms Act and Sections 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act, should be released on bail during the pendency of trial.

¶10

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the court found it a fit case for bail and allowed the bail application; the applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence, no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses, appearance before the trial court on dates fixed), breach of which shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

While opposing bail, the learned AGA for the State was unable to dispute the submissions of the applicant's counsel, including the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶14

Key takeaways

Observations made while granting bail shall not affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.obiter¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted - Allahabad High Court (Krishan Pahal, J.) allowed the bail application of Faeem in Case Crime No. 110 of 2025, P.S. Najibabad, District Bijnor, under Sections 109(1), 3(5) BNS, Sections 3/25/27 Arms Act and Sections 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act, during pendency of trial. Applicant in jail since 03.04.2025; State (AGA) unable to dispute that he has no criminal history; reliance placed on Prabhakar Tewari v. State of U.P., (2020) 11 SCC 648 (pendency of criminal cases by itself no ground to refuse bail). Release ordered on personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering with evidence and intimidating witnesses; observations not to affect the trial court's independent opinion.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119589

¶2

Court No. - 65

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19281 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Faeem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Tripathi,Vinod Kumar Tirpathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant and counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. today are taken on record.

¶8

Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 110 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 3(5) of BNS and Section 3/25/27 of Arms Act and Section 3/5/8 of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Najibabad, District Bijnor, during the pendency of trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR.

¶11

Learned counsel has further stated that false recovery of 45 kg of beef have been foisted on the applicant. The applicant has been made scapegoat by the police to show some good work. It is a clear cut case of false implication.

¶12

The criminal history assigned to the applicant has been explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 03.04.2025 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

Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail

¶14

application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶15

In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648 , the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail.

¶16

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant- Faeem , 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.

¶18

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

¶19

iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Sumit S

¶23

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶24

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

Faeem v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Faeem 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases