Saddiq Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:3307

Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 465 of 2025

Applicant :- Saddiq Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Neeraj Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ran Vijai Singh, learned AGA for the State and Sri Karunesh Singh, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the informant/ complainant. Said Vakalatnama is taken on record.

¶7

As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 11.11.2024 in Case Crime No.308 of 2024, under Sections 64(2)(k), 351 (3) of B.N.S., Police Station – Asiwan, District – Unnao.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR wherein the date of incident has been indicated as 08.09.2024 but the FIR has been lodged on 18.10.2024 i.e. after 40 days. The aforesaid delay has not been explained properly in the FIR. The prosecutrix/ victim is deaf and dumb, however, while recording her statement with the help of expert, she has clarified that she can recognize the person, who has committed rape with her. Since the FIR has been lodged after 40 days, therefore, medical examination was conducted on 21.10.2024 and in such medical examination, the allegations could not be corroborated. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. He is a middle aged person of 50 years. Charge sheet has been filed. The applicant is having permanent address, therefore, there is no flight risk. Further, the applicant undertakes that if he is released on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant/ complainant have opposed the aforesaid bail application. Learned counsel for the informant/ complainant has stated that

¶10

since the prosecutrix is deaf and dumb person, therefore, when she obtained such certificate, she lodged the FIR. Though she approached the police earlier but her FIR was not registered for no reasons. He has further submitted that she is able to identify the accused person if such exercise is undertaken pursuant to the order being passed by the learned Trial Court.

¶11

Without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the FIR; the fact that there is inordinate unexplained delay of 40 days in lodging the FIR; medical examination does not corroborate the allegations so levelled by the prosecutrix; the applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and undertaking of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

¶12

6. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let applicant- Saddiq Ali be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) 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. 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.

¶15

(ii) 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 269 of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶16

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the 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 208 of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶17

(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 under Section 351 of the B.N.S.S., 2023. 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

¶18

default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶20

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶21

Order Date :- 20.1.2025 RBS/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Saddiq Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saddiq Ali 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

Harishyam Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Asim Ansari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Sunil Kumar Pal vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Medical Edu. Lko. and Another

Sita Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Mohd. Akram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another