Rizwan Quraishi Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Govt. Lko.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8139 of 2024

¶3

Rizwan Quraishi

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy.	Home Lko. Govt. Lko.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Sudhaker Prakash, Ajeet Akhilendra Pratap Singh, Atul Verma	Kumar Singh, Amit Bhardwaj,
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A., Mohd. Islam Khan

¶6

Court No. - 15

¶7

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶8

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

¶9

It is alleged in the first information report that due to enmity regarding stale meat given to the nephew of the injured, on 25.3.2024 at about 6.10 p.m. while the injured reached Shahabad and was going home, five named and six unnamed persons, with a common intention, armed with lathi danda and country made pistol, attacked and consequently, his brother Suhail Khan was injured on his neck and hand, with fire arm.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the injured, in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C, though has assigned specific role of firing upon the present applicant, however, during trial before the trial court, the injured, while being examined as P.W.-2, in his examination-in-chief, has assigned general role to all the accused persons. However, during crossexamination, he has out rightly denied the entire prosecution case. Once the complainant and injured are examined, there is no chance of tampering the evidence. Dr. Piyush Gupta, who has examined the injured, in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C, has opined that the injuries received by the injured are simple in nature. P.W-1 has already been examined. The applicant has criminal history of two cases which has been explained in paragraph-11 of the rejoinder affidavit and he is languishing in jail since 26.03.2024.

¶11

He further submits that the co-accused persons namely Naim Qureshi and Tareeq have been granted bail by a co-ordinate bench of this court in Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 9096 of 2024 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4442 of 2024 vide orders dated 03.12.2024 and 10.12.2024 respectively. He

¶12

BAIL No. 8139 of 2024

¶13

2

¶14

seeks parity with the bail order of the said co-accused.

¶15

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶16

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

¶17

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the fact that the complainant and the injured both have been examined, the injured, during his crossexamination, has denied the entire prosecution case and during examinationin-chief has assigned general role to all the accused persons and no specific role has been assigned to the applicant; perusal of the statement of Dr. Piyush Gupta who examined the injured, the fact that the applicant is in jail since 26.03.2024; the fact that out of 24 prosecution witnesses, only two witnesses have been examined; he seeks parity with the bail orders of co-accused Naim Qureshi and Tareeq 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.

¶18

The application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶19

Let the applicant Rizwan Quraishi , involved in Case Crime No. 126 of 2024, under sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 I.P.C, P.S. Shahbad, District Hardoi, 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:-

¶20

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶21

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶22

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court.

¶23

Any other condition(s) which the trial court/concerned court may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed.

¶24

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. November 19, 2025 DiVYa

¶25

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶26

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

Rizwan Quraishi v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Govt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rizwan Quraishi v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Govt. 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

Manju Gautam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

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

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

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

Himanchal Chauhan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Girija Shankar Chaubey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.