Aawesh Alam and Another vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Aawesh Alam and Another vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicants Aawesh Alam and Danish ordered released on bail in Case Crime No. 254 of 2025 on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions: (i) not to tamper with prosecution evidence; (ii) not to pressurize the prosecution witness; (iii) to appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. On breach of any condition, the prosecution may move a bail cancellation application before this Court.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicants, who contend they have been falsely implicated and that the alleged recovery of counterfeit currency and mobile phones is false and planted, are entitled to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 254 of 2025 under Sections 111, 178, 179 and 180 B.N.S., P.S. Khaga, District Fatehpur, during pendency of the trial.

Court's answer

This Court prima facie finds that there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery and that, at this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicants with the offence.

Ratio / Principle

The applicants had remained confined for more than three months with no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension was brought to the fore by the State that they would tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses if enlarged on bail.

Key takeaways

Without commenting on the merits of the case, the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Vivek Varma, J.) allowed the bail application of Aawesh Alam and Danish in Case Crime No. 254 of 2025 under Sections 111, 178, 179 and 180 B.N.S., P.S. Khaga, District Fatehpur. Counterfeit currency and mobile phones were allegedly recovered from the applicants, but the Court prima facie found no independent witness to the alleged recovery and no substantive evidence linking the applicants to the offence. Noting custody exceeding three months, no hope of early trial conclusion, and no State apprehension of evidence-tampering or witness-intimidation, the Court, without commenting on merits, directed release on a personal bond with two sureties each, coupled with conditions against tampering, pressure on witnesses, and requiring appearance on all trial dates; breach permits cancellation by this Court.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36511 of 2025

Aawesh Alam And Another

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Rahul Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 64

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 254 of 2025, under Sections 111, 178, 179 and 180 B.N.S., Police Station- Khaga, District- Fatehpur during pendency of the trial.

Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. Recovery of counterfeit currency and mobile phones has been shown from applicants. It is contended that the alleged recovery is false and planted. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. It is next contended that the applicants are not members of any organized crime syndicate nor they acted on behalf of such syndicate. The applicants are in jail since 7.7.2025. In case they are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the said liberty.

Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicants with the offence. Further the applicants have presently remained confined for more than three months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial,

BAIL No. 36511 of 2025

2

more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicants, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Let the applicants, Aawesh Alam and Danish involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

i. the applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

ii. the applicants shall not pressurize the prosecution witness;

iii. the applicants shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

October 17, 2025 Manish Kr

(Vivek Varma,J.)

Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad