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

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35462

Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5336 of 2025

Applicant :- Nasir Ali Siddiqui Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Mishra,Arun Chand Pandey,Ram Bahadur Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Vakalatnama filed by Ms. Shivani Tiwari, Advocate holding brief on behalf of Mr. Srees Kumar Srivastava and Mr. Vinod Kumar Tiwari, Advocates on behalf of informant is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.319 of 2024 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 323, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 66D of IT Act, Police Station- Sarojani Nagar, District- Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 17.07.2024. He further submits that the FIR of case in question was lodged against the applicant for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 323, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 66-D of IT Act, and thereafter, charge-sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer including Sections 409 and 420 I.P.C. He further submits that it is well settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. and Ors. Vs. State of U.P. and Anr. reported in (2024) SCC OnLine SC 2248 that trial for the offences of cheating as well as embezzlement cannot run together. He further submits that applicant is having criminal history of seven other cases, charge sheet has already been filed and there is no possibility of tampering of evidences. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned AGA vehemently opposes the prayer of applicant

¶11

and submitted that after detailed investigation, charge sheet has been submitted but he does not dispute this fact that trial under Sections 409 and 420 I.P.C. cannot run together.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, going through the contents of application, judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant as well as other relevant documents, as it is well settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. (supra) that offences punishable under Sections 409 and 420 should not be tried together. Therefore, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶13

Let applicant - Nasir Ali Siddiqui @ Nasir Ali - 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:-

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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

¶20

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.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 12.6.2025 Satish

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

Vishal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Irfan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Indu Dhar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 2 Others

Shiva Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Pradeep Singh Alias Baba vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another