Ajuban @ Ayyub Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7882 of 2025

Ajuban @ Ayyub

	.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Indrajeet
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 12

¶6

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶7

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶8

2. The present application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in FIR/Case Crime No.61 of 2025, under Sections 191(2) 105, 351(2) & 352 of B.N.S., Police Station Chinhat, District Lucknow.

¶9

3. 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 allegation has been levelled against four accused persons. As per the FIR, no specific role to cause fatal injury has been attributed to the present applicant. Even the injured has not attributed any specific role to the present applicant to cause fatal injury. Learned counsel has stated that both the sides are relatives to each other and on account of trivial dispute, scuffle between the parties took place. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Charge sheet has been filed. 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.

¶10

4. He further submits that co-accused Sanu has been granted bail by coordinate Bench this Court vide order dated 17.7.2025 in CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6502 of 2025. He seeks parity with the bail order of the said co-accused.

¶11

BAIL No. 7882 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

5. Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the bail application but he could not dispute that it is a case of parity.

¶14

6. 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 as per the FIR, no specific role to cause fatal injury has been attributed to the present applicant; even the injured has not attributed any specific role to the present applicant to cause fatal injury; both sides are relatives and on account of trivial dispute, scuffle between the parties took place; 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; he seeks parity with the bail order of coaccused Sanu, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

¶15

7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶16

8. Let applicant- Ajuban @ Ayyub 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:-

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

BAIL No. 7882 of 2025

¶21

3

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

August 25, 2025

¶25

Madhu D.R/P.S

¶26

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶27

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ajuban @ Ayyub v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajuban @ Ayyub v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jameel Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko

Ankit @ Ankit Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Smt Sharda Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Smt. Sonam Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Matole Alias Mata Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Ankit @ Ramjeet Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another