Mirza Galib @ Israr Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31680 of 2025

Mirza Galib @ Israr Ahmad

Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ankit Kapoor
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

with
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATIO	N No.	- 31875 of 2025
Sikandar Ali		.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Ankit Kapoor
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.
Court No.- 66

¶6

HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

¶7

1. List revised.

¶8

2. Heard Sri Ankit Kapoor, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the material on record.

¶9

3. These two bail applications are connected together as they arise out of same case crime number and are connected together in compliance of the order dated 16.09.2025 passed in the case of accused Mirza Galib @ Israr Ahmad and the order dated 18.09.2025 in the case of accused Sikandar Ali.

¶10

4. The bail application of Sikandar Ali is a second bail application. The first bail application of the applicant Sikandar Ali was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 11.08.2025 passed in

¶11

BAIL No. 31680 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 24865 of 2025 (Sikandar Ali Vs. State of U.P.) which reads as under:-

¶14

"1. List revised.

¶15

2. Heard Sri Ankit Kapoor, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

¶16

3. Sri Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam, learned counsel for the first informant is not present even in the revised list. Previously on 21.7.2025 also learned counsel for the first informant was not present even in the revised list but in the interest of justice as a last opportunity the matter was adjourned and it was made clear that the matter will not be adjourned on the next date.Office has placed on record vakalatnama of learned counsel for the first informant through its report dated 26.7.2025. The said order reads as under:-

¶17

"1. List revised.

¶18

2. Sri Ankit Kapoor, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for State are present. Sri Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam, learned counsel for the first informant is not present even when the matter is taken in the revised list.

¶19

3. The Vakalatnama of Sri Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam, learned counsel for the first informant is not on record. Office to trace out the same and place it on record by the next date.

¶20

4. Since there is no representation from the side of the first informant, in the interest of justice as a last opportunity, the matter is adjourned for today.

¶21

5. Let the matter be listed on 11.08.2025 as fresh.

¶22

6. It is made clear that the matter will not be adjourned on the next date as a matter of right."

¶23

4. This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the applicant Sikandar Ali, seeking release on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 9 of 2025, under Sections 69, 74, 89, 127, 351(2) BNS, registered at P.S. Mahila Thana, District Varanasi.

¶24

5. Learned counsel for State points that as per his instructions the applicant is reported to be involved in one other case which has not been disclosed and explained and as such recital made in para-20 of the affidavit is false and incorrect. He submits that the bail application be dismissed in view of the order/judgement of the Apex Court passed in the cases of Munnesh Vs. State of U.P.: SLP (Crl.) No. 1400 / 2025 and Kaushal Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan : 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1473.

¶25

6. Learned counsel for the applicant prays that since the criminal history of the applicant has not been disclosed and explained of the other cases, the present bail application under Section 483 BNSS be dismissed as withdrawn as he intends to file a better application with full and complete documents.

¶26

BAIL No. 31680 of 2025

¶27

3

¶28

7. Prayer as prayed is allowed.

¶29

8. The bail application is dismissed as withdrawn."

¶30

5. Both the matters were placed along with the office report dated 26.09.2025 in the case of Sikandar Ali before Hon'ble The Chief Justice for passing appropriate orders on which the matters have been nominated to this Bench vide order dated 06.10.2025 of Hon'ble The Chief Justice.

¶31

6. The matters are thus being heard and decided by a common order.

¶32

7. The bail application No. 31680 of 2025 under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Mirza Galib @ Israr Ahmad , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 09 of 2025, under Sections 69, 74, 351 (2), 127(2), 61(2) Kha B.N.S., Police Station Mahila Thana, District Varanasi.

¶33

8. The bail application No. 31875 of 2025 under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Sikandar Ali , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 09 of 2025, under Sections 69, 74, 89, 127, 351 (2) B.N.S., Police Station Mahila Thana, District Varanasi.

¶34

9. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 06.05.2025 by the victim against Sikandar and Mirza Galib alleging therein that she started talking with Sikandar on her mobile and both of them started meeting each other. In the meantime, the said accused lured her and established physical relationship with her. She became pregnant and told Sikandar about it on which he gave her some medicine due to which the said pregnancy was aborted. She then became ill. Looking to her condition her family members contacted the family members of the accused and they decided to marry them. In pursuance of the said decision on 12.10.2024 engagement ceremony was solemnized. Subsequently on 22.04.2025 at about 3 pm the accused persons called her to their house to meet her on which Mirza Galib the friend of Sikandar was also present who took her inside the workshop, closed the door and threatened her and started forceful acts with her which was opposed

¶35

BAIL No. 31680 of 2025

¶36

4

¶37

by her then Mirza Galib threatened her of life and stated that she may remain silent and do as per the directions of Sikandar. She got terrified and then Sikandar forcibly established physical relationship with her. Mirza Galib then took her out of the house and went away. She then got consoled and saved herself and came back. When she contacted the accused about marriage they refused it, abused her and assaulted her. Her family members were also thrown out.

¶38

10. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the first information report has been lodged after an inordinate delay of about 14 days from the date of last incident. It is submitted that in so far as the accused Mirza Galib is concerned, he is not stated to have committed sexual on the victim / first informant. It is submitted that in so far as the accused Sikandar Ali is concerned, the relationship between him and the victim was a consensual relationship after which some discussion of marriage took place between them and their family members which did not materialize. It is further submitted that the victim is a major girl aged about 24 years and thus she was well aware of the consequences of the act being done by her. It is submitted that even the victim became pregnant once and at that point of time no compliant whatsoever was made by the victim or by her family members to any authorities. It is submitted that it was only when discussion of marriage did not materialize the present first information report has been lodged. It is submitted that the applicant- Mirza Galib has no criminal history as stated in para 24 of the affidavit and is in jail since 05.07.2025. The applicant- Sikandar Ali was involved in a case of the year 2017 in which after compromise a Final Report dated 18.06.2017 has been filed before the court concerned which is pending consideration, paragraph 22 of the affidavit has been placed before the Court for the same. The applicant Sikandar Ali is in jail since 07.05.2025.

¶39

11. Per contra , learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail of both the accused persons.

¶40

12. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the victim is a major girl. The victim was having some relationship with the applicant Sikandar Ali and had also

¶41

BAIL No. 31680 of 2025

¶42

5

¶43

become pregnant due to the same which was got aborted. No compliant whatsoever was made earlier at that point of time by her or by her family members. In so far as the accused Mirza Galib is concerned, he is not stated to have committed sexual on the victim.

¶44

13. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicants may be enlarged on bail.

¶45

14. Let the applicants- Mirza Galib @ Israr Ahmad and Sikandar Ali , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶46

(i) The applicants will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶47

(ii) The applicants will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶48

(iii) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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.

¶49

(iv) The applicants will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under section 84 B.N.S.S., 2023 may be issued and if applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under section 209 B.N.S., 2023.

¶50

(v) The applicants 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 351 B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants are deliberate

¶51

BAIL No. 31680 of 2025

¶52

6

¶53

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 them in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 B.N.S., 2023.

¶54

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicants.

¶55

15. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicants to prison.

¶56

16. The bail applications are allowed .

¶57

17. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶58

October 15, 2025 AS Rathore

¶59

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶60

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mirza Galib @ Israr Ahmad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mirza Galib @ Israr Ahmad 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases