Allowed

Islam v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Aug 2025BAIL/29559/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second bail application by an accused in a 2022 case of rioting and attempt to murder; counsel noted the injured prosecution witness did not support the prosecution in cross-examination. Court granted bail on personal bond with two sureties and standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two heavy local sureties, subject to standard conditions including non-tampering with evidence and appearing before trial court.

Islam vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29559 of 2025

Islam

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Utkarsh Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 65

¶8

HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶10

2.. This is the second bail application filed by the applicant. First bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 28.04.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.13782 of 2025.

¶11

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 by the efflux of time, trial began and during the trial, the statement of P.W. 2-injured during his cross could not support the prosecution version, copy of statement has been produced before this Court and is marked as "X". He thus submits that no offence against the applicant is made out. Several other submissions in order to 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 25.03.2025, having no criminal history.

¶12

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

¶13

BAIL No. 29559 of 2025

¶14

¶15

adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

¶16

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.

¶17

Let applicant Islam involved in Case Crime No. 114 of 2022 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 307, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Nakur, District Saharanpur, 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:-

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

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.

¶23

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.

¶24

(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)

¶25

October 16, 2025 S.Ali

¶26

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

Islam v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Islam v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Manish Dubey vs State of U.P. and Another

Krishna Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jitendra vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sunil Kumar vs State of U.P.

Sarvesh Yadav Alias Aditya Yadav vs State of U.P.

Devendra Kumar Sharma vs State of U.P.