Abdul Ali Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Abdul Ali Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Abdul Ali enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 336 of 2024 on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence, no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses, appearance before trial court on fixed dates); breach of conditions to constitute ground for cancellation of bail.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 336 of 2024 on the ground of parity with the similarly placed co-accused Javed Akhtar, who has already been enlarged on bail by the same Bench of this Court. +1 more

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail and allowed the bail application on the ground of parity.

Ratio / Principle

The Court ordered that the applicant be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Key takeaways

Condition (i) imposed on the applicant: he shall not tamper with the evidence during trial.ratio¶19
Condition (ii) imposed on the applicant: he shall not pressurise/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.ratio¶20
Condition (iii) imposed on the applicant: he shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Court No. 67), Krishan Pahal, J., allowed Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 31847 of 2025 on 24.09.2025, enlarging applicant Abdul Ali on bail in Case Crime No. 336 of 2024, P.S. Kotwali Sambhal, District Sambhal, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109(1), 125, 221, 132, 121(1), 121(2) and 223B of B.N.S. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, pending trial. Grant rested on parity: similarly placed co-accused Javed Akhtar had already been enlarged on bail by the same Bench vide order dated 28.07.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 22466 of 2025, and the A.G.A., while opposing the prayer, did not dispute these factual aspects of parity. The order invoked the Supreme Court's observation in Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail; three cases were stated to have been foisted against the applicant and he was languishing in jail since 20.06.2025. Release was directed on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence, pressurising/intimidating witnesses and absence from trial-court dates, breach constituting ground for cancellation; the Court expressly withheld any opinion on the merits.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31847 of 2025

Abdul Ali

.....Applicant(s)

Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Saiyad Iqbal Ahmed Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 67

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

List has been revised.

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

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 336 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109(1), 125, 221, 132, 121(1), 121(2), 223B of B.N.S. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Kotwali Sambhal, District Sambhal during the pendency of trial.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Javed Akhtar has already been enlarged on bail by the same Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.07.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 22466 of 2025. It is further submitted that since the case of the applicant is at par to the co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 20.06.2025. In all, three cases are stated to have been foisted against the applicant at a go. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused have not been disputed by him.

In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another,

BAIL No. 31847 of 2025

2

(2020) 11 SCC 648 , the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, evidence on record, pending trial and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

Let the applicant- Abdul Ali , 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.

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

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

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

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

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.

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

September 24, 2025

Sumit S

Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad