Mohd. Noor Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Heard Sri Thakur Prasad Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri P.K. Bisnoi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Prabhakar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record.

¶10

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 242 of 2024, under Sections 354, 341, 354-ka, 504, 506 of IPC and Sections 9/10 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Kanth, District - Moradabad, during the pendency of trial.

¶11

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have outraged the modesty of the victim and is even stated to have chased her several times after his release from jail between 20.03.2024 to 08.05.2024.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by more than one month and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The FIR has been lodged as an afterthought and after legal consultations.

¶13

Learned counsel has also stated that the allegations are per se false. Prior to the institution of instant FIR, the FIR No. 193 of 2023 was instituted against the applicant at the same police station by the same informant u/s 376 & 506 IPC and sections 3/4 of POCSO Act and he was released from jail in the said case and then the instant FIR has been instituted by the same informant. It is also stated that the applicant was acquitted in the said case vide order dated 03.09.2024 by the Special Judge, POCSO Act, Court No. 2/

¶14

BAIL No. 26100 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

A.D.J., Moradabad passed in Sessions Trial No. 1159 of 2023, as such, it is a clear cut case of false implication.

¶17

Learned counsel has next contended that there is no medical corroboration of the incident. The instant FIR has been instituted just to keep the applicant behind the bars. The applicant has no previous criminal history except the aforesaid case instituted by the same informant. He is languishing in jail since 4.7.2025 and deserves to be released on bail. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.

¶18

Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history except the said case.

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence, severity of punishment and also considering the allegations made by the same informant in the earlier FIR No. 193 of 2023 which resulting in acquittal coupled by the fact that the instant FIR is delayed by more than one month, prima facie I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶20

Let the applicant- Mohd. Noor , 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.

¶21

i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶22

ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

September 19, 2025 Siddhant

¶27

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

¶28

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohd. Noor v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Noor 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