Kasif vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:56190

Court No. - 67

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4423 of 2025

Applicant :- Kasif Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satya Narayan Gupta,Yogendra Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.

¶6

The instant application has been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 07 of 2025 under sections 317(2), 317(4), 317 (5) of BNS, Police Station - Delhi Gate, District - Meerut.

¶7

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant/petitioner has submitted that the applicant is innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. It is submitted that the applicant is purchaser of batteries and electric engine and he has not committed any offence of removing batteries and electric engine of E-Rikshaw. It is submitted that co-accused Faizan has committed the offence of removing batteries and electric engine from E-Rikshaw. The applicant is just a bonafide purchaser and he has a business of selling and purchasing the batteries and electric engine of E-Rikshaws. He was not aware about the fact that the said battery and electric engine was stolen from E-Rikshaw by the co-accused Faizan. It is further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history and on arrest in the present case, one case has been lodged against him by the police, which has been explained in para-27 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application.

¶8

It is further submitted that main accused Faizan has already been released on bail vide order dated 11.3.2025 by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8562 of 2025 (Faizan Vs. State of UP).

¶9

It is also submitted that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is prayed on behalf of the applicant that the applicant may be released on bail in the aforesaid crime. He is languishing in jail since 11.1.2025. It is further undertaken that applicant shall

¶10

abide by all terms and conditions as imposed by the Court.

¶11

Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the instant bail application and submitted that the applicant has been arrested on the spot alongwith co-accused Faizan. He further submitted that there is no force in the argument of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was not aware about the fact of stolen battery and electric engine. He has purchased the said battery and electric engine on cheaper price and selling the same on higher price in open market. He further submitted that taking into consideration of seriousness of the offence, the applicant is not entitled for any leniency by this Court for the purpose of granting bail to him. There is no merit in the bail application for granting bail as prayed by the applicant. However, the learned AGA has not contradicted that the main accused Faizan has already been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State, perused the material available on record.

¶13

I have gone through the contents made in the application as well as the documents appended with the application and perused the affidavit. It is admitted fact that the applicant is not involved in stealing of batteries and electric engine of E-Rikshaw. He is only a bona fide purchaser of the same. The main accused Faizan has already been granted bail, who has committed the crime of theft of batteries and electric engine. Taking into consideration all entirety of the matter as discussed above, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. The bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant - Kasif who is involved in the aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rupees Fifty thousand and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶15

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

¶16

(ii) 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./351 BNSS. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate of without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty

¶17

of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 16.4.2025 S.K.S.

¶20

(Chandra Dhari Singh,J.)

¶21

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

Kasif v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kasif 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

Swati Bhargava vs State of U.P. and Another

Rakesh Tiwari vs State of U.P. and Another

Rupendra Dev vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vibha vs State of U.P.

Neeraj vs State of U.P.

Sumit vs State of U.P.