Tahir Khan vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35416 of 2025

Tahir Khan

.....Applicant(s)

Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Babhru Vahan Singh, Manvendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 70

¶6

HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J.

¶7

Supplementary affidavit filed, today in Court, on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the Staterespondents and perused the record.

¶9

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant Tahir Khan seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.591 of 2025, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station Ramgarhtal, District Gorakhpur.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused-applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in this case on a false and concocted story. Applicant is languishing in jail since 12.9.2025. It is submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR and he has no relation with Apex hospital and Decent hospital. It is further submitted that the applicant has not committed any fault on his part regarding insurance police issued by Bajaj Allianz and name of applicant has surfaced during course of investigation at a very belated stage on the basis of statement of one Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh, who has stated that he has not provided any medical treatment and his forged signatures are said to have been made on medical prescriptions. It is argued that applicant is not the beneficiary of so called medical claim policy. It is further argued that accused applicant has no criminal antecedents. Submission is that the conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release

¶11

BAIL No. 35416 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶14

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail but could not dispute the aforesaid submission.

¶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 the paragraph no.53 of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024, (SC) LawSuit 677 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials 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. 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.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 BNS.

¶19

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of BNSS is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC/209 of BNS.

¶20

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without

¶21

BAIL No. 35416 of 2025

¶22

3

¶23

sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

October 14, 2025 RA

¶27

(Santosh Rai,J.)

¶28

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

Tahir Khan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tahir Khan 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

Padam Singh @ Rahul vs State of U.P.

Devendra Prasad Yadav vs State of U.P.

Diksha Tiwari vs State of U.P.

Pushkar Madhesiya vs State of U.P.

Rohan Singh vs State of U.P.

Vipin Dixit Alias Lalla vs State of U.P.