Mohd. Mustaq Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35198

Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3915 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd. Mustaq Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Farooq Ayoob,Mansi Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Alok Kumar Singh,Satyam Maurya

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.89 of 2024 under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120B I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 17.03.2024. He further submitted that the loan amount of Rs.12,00,000/- was taken from the HDFC Bank by the applicant in accordance with law and he tried his best to refund the amount but due to some financial issues, EMI could not be deposited within time, as a result, in order to recover the loan amount, present FIR was lodged. He further submitted that there is a statutory remedy available for recovery of the loan amount but the Bank misused the liberty and initiated criminal prosecution. He further submitted that applicant is having no criminal antecedent and charge sheet has already been filed and there is no possibility of tampering of evidences. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of the applicant for grant of bail and submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed after collecting sufficient evidences. Therefore, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶9

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of the F.I.R., other relevant documents as well as totality of fact and circumstances, it is evident that the prosecution in question has arisen for non payment of EMI of loan taken by the applicant and there is a statutory remedy available to the bank for recovery of the loan amount. Therefore, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Let applicant - Mohd. Mustaq - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶13

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶14

(iv) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶15

(v) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if 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.

¶16

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without 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.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 10.6.2025/V. Sinha

¶19

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Mustaq v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Mustaq v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

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

Vishal Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Mahendra Kumar @ Mahendra Jaiswal and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lal Bahadur Shastri Bhawan Lko. and 2 Others

Mahek Vimal Thru. Her Husband Satyam Verma @ Siddharth Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. and 5 Others

Nitin Vikram Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Jyoti @ Babli Maurya vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko

Juvenile X, Thru. His Father and Natural Guardian vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another