Shahadat Khan Alias Guddu vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:29654

Court No. - 67

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3761 of 2025

Applicant :- Shahadat Khan Alias Guddu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Dubey,Chandra Bhan Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-opposite party.

¶7

The instant bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.443 of 2021, under Sections 366, 380, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Bithri Chainpur, District Bareilly, during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred in the intervening night of 23/24.8.2021. The first information report was lodged on 18.10.2021. The delay is fatal to the prosecution case. Prior to lodging of the first information report, the husband of the informant/victim lodged a missing report at police station Bithri Chainpur, Bareilly. In the said missing report the statement of the victim was recorded by the police. In the said statement the informant/victim had stated that she had left her house voluntarily. In such circumstances it is contended that the present F.I.R. has been lodged only for the purposes of harassment. No such incident had occurred. There are contradictions in the statement of the victim under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. The said contradictions discredit the prosecution case. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph nos.29 and 30 of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 21.12.2024 and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that there is delay in lodging the first information report. Prior to lodging of the first information report, the husband of the informant/victim lodged a missing report at police station Bithri Chainpur, Bareilly. In the said missing report the statement of the victim was recorded by the police. In the said statement the informant/victim had stated that she had left her house voluntarily. Further, in the present case, there are contradictions in the statement of the victim under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than two months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Let the applicant Shahadat Khan Alias Guddu, involved in the aforesaid 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 the conditions that he:

¶12

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶13

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶14

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 3.3.2025 Manish Kr

¶17

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

Shahadat Khan Alias Guddu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahadat Khan Alias Guddu 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shailendra Chauhan Alias Bittu Chauhan vs State of U.P.

Ajeet Kumar Nair vs State of U.P.

Anmol Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Sankalp Kumar and Another vs State of Up and Another

Rakesh Bhartiya vs State of U.P.

Kishun Chauhan vs State of Upand 2 Others