Salik vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:12504

Court No. - 35

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2562 of 2025

Applicant :- Salik Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Swati Agrawal Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

Heard Mrs. Swati Agrawal Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.453 of 2024, under Sections 302, 34, 120-B IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Shahar, District- Bijnor.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has neither committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR nor named in the FIR. The applicant has criminal history of two cases in which he has already been granted bail by the court below. The applicant is in jail since 4.6.2024.

¶9

It is further contended that similarly placed co-accused, person, namely, Faizan, Haseen, Mohd. Waseem and Atul Chaudhary @ Navjot Chaudhary have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 10.1.2025, 17.10.2024, 23.8.2024, 28.08.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 42713 of 2024, 34820 of 2024, 26143 of 2024 and 26403 of 2024 respectively, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity.

¶10

I have perused the bail order of the co-accused and find that the role assigned to the present applicant is almost similar to that of co-accused persons, who have already been granted bail by this Court.

¶11

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the

¶12

application for bail but could not dispute the submission raised by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶14

Let the applicant- Salik , 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.

¶15

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶16

(ii) 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 under Section 229-A IPC.

¶17

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if 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 174-A IPC.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour

¶20

and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

With the above observation/direction, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶24

Order Date :- 24.1.2025 Krishna*

¶25

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

Salik v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salik 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

Arvind vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Manoj Singh vs State of U.P.

Ravi Alias Raviarya vs State of U.P.

Dev vs State of U.P. and Another

Sumit Yadav vs State of U.P.

Aashif vs State of U.P. and 3 Others