Faisal vs State of U.P.

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant Faisal seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.369 of 2025, under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad.

¶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. Applicant is languishing in jail since 1.11.2025. It is submitted that six accused persons including the applicant are named in the FIR which has been registered with the allegation that police has spot arrested six accused persons on an information received from secret informer that a gang of thieves who used to steal radio receiver units and other equipment from mobile towers were going to sell stolen items. It is further submitted that only Rs.100/- was said to be recovered from the possession of applicant, who is said to be seated in the back seat of vehicle from which recovery of radio receiver of mobile tower, mobile tower base unit were shown but neither the applicant was owner of said vehicle nor any independent and reliable witness was present at the time of preparation of recovery memo and arrest of applicant. It is argued that co-accused Ayan @ Annan, Anas having similar role have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 10.12.2025, 17.12.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.42712 of 2025, 44536 of 2025 respectively and parity is sought in the matter. It is further argued that applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit. Submission is that the conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of

¶11

BAIL No. 44739 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pretrial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. It is further submitted that, in case the applicant is released on bail, he may again indulge in similar activities and misuse the liberty of bail.

¶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 paragraph no.53 of Apex Court in case of Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024 (SC) LawSuit 677 , dictum of Apex Court in Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb (2021) 3 SCC 713 & Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. (2022) 10 SCC 51 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.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the court concerned.

¶19

(iv) 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 of accused personally to explain circumstances appearing in the evidence against him.

¶20

(v) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him strictly, in accordance with law.

¶21

BAIL No. 44739 of 2025

¶22

3

¶23