Javed Khan @ Javed Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36054

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5391 of 2025

Applicant :- Javed Khan @ Javed Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in FIR No. 0702 of 2024, under Sections 64(1), 123, 351(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 67 of IT Act, 2000, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh.

¶8

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He next submits that the First Information Report is lodged with delay of 7 months as the incident is said to have taken place in the month of May, 2024, whereas the FIR is lodged on 31st of December, 2024. He also submits that due to extraneous reasons and anonymity, the applicant is named in the First Information Report and no such rape has ever been committed by the applicant. He next added that the medical examination is denied by the alleged victim. He also submits that the chargesheet has been filed in the case, as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses. He next added that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and has no previous criminal antecedent and he is languishing in jail since 11.02.2025 and he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Thus, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and has submitted that the applicant is involved in committing the heinous offence and, as such, he is not entitled for bail.

¶10

Having considered the submissions of learned counsels

¶11

for the parties and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the FIR has been lodged with delay of 7 months; the applicant is named in the FIR due to extraneous reasons and anonymity; the alleged victim has denied for medical examination; the chargesheet has been filed in the matter, therefore, there is no chance of tampering the evidences or threatening the witnesses by the applicant; the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 11.02.2025, coupled with the fact that he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

¶13

Let the applicant- Javed Khan @ Javed Ali involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, 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

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶15

(2) 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. He 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 of the Indian Penal Code;

¶16

(3) 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 313 Cr.P.C.; and

¶17

(4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails

¶18

to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶20

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶21

Order Date :- 23.6.2025 kkv/

¶22

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

Javed Khan @ Javed Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Javed Khan @ Javed Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. 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

Akhilesh Mishra @ Monu Mishra and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Budhiram Alias Budhai vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and 2 Others

Karm Veer Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Babban @ Parvesh Shukla Vs State of U.P. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Chandra Prakash Rai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko