Taqui Mohammad vs State of U.P.

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Taqui Mohammad with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 0064 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 147, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Anwarganj, District Kanpur Nagar during pendency of trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that accused applicant and informant both are real brothers and the land in dispute was taken by the accused applicant as vendee in the year 2003 and the F.I.R. was registered at very belated stage i.e. on 19.07.2023 and no plausible explanation has been given by the prosecution in this regard. He further submits that there was dispute between the accused applicant and informant with regard to the land in question. He further submits that earlier wife of the applicant had lodged F.I.R. on 06.01.2023 against the informant with the allegation that by using forged signature of applicant and his wife, informant had filed application before the Secretary, U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board, Lucknow for declaring him Mutawalli of the land in dispute. He further submits that instant F.I.R. was lodged by the informant in counterblast to the earlier F.I.R. which was lodged by the wife of applicant. He further submits that applicant has no criminal

¶11

BAIL No. 33544 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

history. He further submits that trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has 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. Applicant is languishing in jail since 28.08.2025.

¶14

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

¶15

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering paragraph no.53 of Apex Court in case of Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024 (SC) LawSuit 677, dictum of Apex Court in Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb (2021) 3 SCC 713 & Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. (2022) 10 SCC 51 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that:-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the court concerned.

¶19

(iv) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial

¶20

BAIL No. 33544 of 2025

¶21

3

¶22

Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement of accused personally to explain circumstances appearing in the evidence against him.

¶23

(v) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him strictly in accordance with law.

¶24

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

¶25

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶26

(Santosh Rai,J.)

¶27

November 17, 2025

¶28

Bhanu

¶29

Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Taqui Mohammad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Taqui Mohammad 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

Devendra Prasad Yadav vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Kushwaha vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Irfan and Another vs State of U.P.

Awadesh Kumar Agrahari vs State of U.P.

Ramesh Chandra Katiyar vs State of U.P.

Awadesh Kumar Agrahari vs State of U.P.