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

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46530

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6208 of 2024

Applicant :- Zafar Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Verma,Akhilendra Pratap Singh,Mohd Agha Haider Rizvi,Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

This is the second bail application. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected on 24.11.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 7848 of 2022.

¶7

Heard Shri Atul Verma, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rao Narendra Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 29.10.2021 at about 09.30 am, the younger brother of the complainant namely, Taufiq has been attacked by the six named accused persons by knife. It is alleged that the sister of the complainant and one Sonu started shouting and raising alarm. Still the accused persons kept on stabbing the deceased. Gausiya and Sonu took the injured to Trauma Centre where he was declared dead.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that out of 23 prosecution witnesses, five witnesses of fact have been examined. The remainder of five witnesses of fact have been discharged by the trial court vide order dated 12.12.2024. It is next submitted that there is no likelihood of the conclusion of trial as at this stage, on 20.2.2025, an application under Section 319 CrPC has been filed by the complainant, which is pending disposal.

¶10

It is further submitted that the applicant has explained the criminal history of one case of petty offence. He is languishing in jail for approximately three and a half years, i.e., since 12.02.2022. Since November 2024, no prosecution witness has been examined and thus, the trial is going on at a snail's pace. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for

¶12

the applicant.

¶13

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also the fact that all the fact witnesses have been examined; only formal witnesses are left to be examined; an application under Section 319 CrPC moved by the complainant on 20.2.2025 is pending for disposal; the applicant has no criminal history; he is languishing in jail since 12.02.2022, the trial is not likely to be concluded in the near future as well as the judgements of the Apex Court in re: Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1693 and Union of India Vs. K.A. Najeeb (2021) 3 SCC 713 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant- Zafar Khan involved in Case Crime No. 309 of 2021, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station- Hasanganj, District- Lucknow, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

(iii) 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.

¶19

(iv) 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.

¶20

(v) 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 in accordance with law.

¶21

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section

¶22

84 B.N.S.S. 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 209 of B.N.S.

¶23

Order Date :- 8.8.2025 Shravan

¶24

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

Zafar Khan v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zafar Khan 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Monu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vipul Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Nisar Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt.

Karan and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sajan @ Ram Sanehi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Pravesh Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.