Mohammad Jamal vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22989 of 2025

Versus Mohammad Jamal		.....Applicant(s)
State Of U.P. And 3 Others		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Moha	mmad Mustafa
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶3

Court No. - 65

¶4

HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

¶5

Office vide its report dated 27.08.2025 has reported that notice issued to the first informant of the case, has been served personally. However, none appears for the informant inspite of revision of list.

¶6

Heard Sri Z.U.Farooqui and Ms. Farha Naaz, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that according to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of B.N.S.S., the victim has specifically stated that she was in talking terms with the applicant since last ten months and he is her boy friend and on 09.10.2024 she had herself asked the applicant to run away as such they ran away and physical relations were also established with her consent. Learned counsel further argued that the radiological age of the victim is 17 years and that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is thus contended that no offence against the applicant is made out. Several other submissions in order to

¶8

BAIL No. 22989 of 2025

¶9

2

¶10

demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 16.10.2024. having no criminal history.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

¶12

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence, and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let applicant Mohammad Jamal involved in Case Crime No.272 of 2024 under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of BNS, and Section 4/2 of POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Gorakhpur, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶14

A. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

B. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

BAIL No. 22989 of 2025

¶17

3

¶18

C. The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶19

D. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is an accused, or suspected, of the commission of he is suspected.

¶20

E. 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

¶22

October 27, 2025 S.Ali

¶23

(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohammad Jamal v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Jamal v. State of U.P. 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

Vicky Chhabra vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Kumar Maheshwari vs State of U.P. and Another

Ganga @ Ajhar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Saurabh vs State of U.P. and Another

Jaypal Rajput vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vikas Shankhwar vs State of Up and 3 Others