Irfan v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Bail application under Section 483 BNSS for accused in a multi-section BNS case at Bareilly. Counsel sought bail on parity with co-accused already released; AGA opposed. Court found a case for bail and allowed it.
What did the court decide?
Accused-applicant Irfan released on bail on personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to conditions including non-tampering with evidence and regular appearance before the trial court.
What the court decided
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:46603
Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2829 of 2025
Applicant :- Irfan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kant Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.
- Heard Sri Krishna Kant Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Ramendra Pal Singh, learned AGA for the Staterespondents and perused the record.
- This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accusedapplicant, Irfan, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 218 of 2024, under Sections 191 (2), 191 (3), 190, 132, 125 (1), 221, 224, 331 (5), 324, 109, 3 (5), 61 (2) BNS and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Shahi, DistrictBareilly.
- Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accusedapplicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 20.07.2024. It is submitted that similarly placed co-accused, Yaseen Shah @ Aseen Shah, Mohd. Umar and Mohd. Naseem, have already been enlarged on bail of by the Bench of this Court by orders dated 24.02.2025, 20.02.2025 and 06.03.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 47258 of 2024, 598 of 2025 and 4308 of 2025, respectively, copy of the bail orders produced by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of coaccused, Yaseen Shah @ Aseen Shahl, Mohd. Umar and Mohd Naseem, who have already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. He has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the accused-applicant Irfan should be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 218 of 2024 on parity with co-accused already released on bail.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Irfan
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Ashutosh Srivastava
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · April
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/2829/2025
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court