Allowed¶10

Sarfaraz v. State of U.P. Thru. Cb.Cid, Lko.

Allahabad HC18 Feb 2025BAIL/833/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted - Sarfaraz - Crl.M.B.A. No. 833/2025 - Case Crime No. 0317/2018 - Ss. 307 & 504 IPC - P.S. Gudamba, Lucknow - custody since 17.01.2025 - no criminal history - CB-CID chargesheet after transfer from police final report - co-accused Asif (knife role) on bail - prima facie no cogent evidence - personal bond + two sureties - conditions incl. S.229-A IPC, S.313 CrPC, S.82 CrPC, S.174-A IPC - Article 21 Constitution - AHC-LKO 2025:AHC-LKO:10523 - 18.2.2025 - Shree Prakash Singh, J.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Sarfaraz on bail during trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the four imposed conditions and verification of sureties, with liberty reserved to the court below to cancel bail on breach. ¶10

Sarfaraz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Cb.Cid, Lko. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶10

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Sarfaraz, named in Case Crime No. 0317 of 2018 under sections 307 and 504 of IPC (P.S.-Gudamba, District Lucknow), should be released on bail during the trial.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

After hearing both sides and perusing the record, the court found the applicant languishing in jail since 17.01.2025 with no previous criminal history and prima facie no cogent piece of evidence connecting him with the offence.

¶8

Key takeaways

Considering the submissions of counsel, nature of accusation, severity of punishment on conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution, and without expressing any view on the merits of the case, the court found it to be a fit case of bail.ratio¶9
The court ordered release of the applicant on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to imposed conditions: no tampering with prosecution evidence or intimidating/pressurising witnesses; undertaking not to seek adjournments when witnesses are present and presence on each date fixed personally or through counsel, failing which the trial court may proceed under Section 229-A IPC; presence in person at opening of case, framing of charge and recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and upon misuse of bail liberty followed by proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. and failure to appear, initiation of proceedings under Section 174-A IPC; identity/status/residential proof of sureties to be verified and breach entitles the court below to cancel bail and remand to prison.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), order dated 18.2.2025 (Shree Prakash Singh, J.), Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 833 of 2025: bail allowed to applicant Sarfaraz in Case Crime No. 0317 of 2018 under sections 307 and 504 of IPC, P.S.-Gudamba, District Lucknow. Facts relied on: applicant languishing in jail since 17.01.2025; no previous criminal history; police had filed a final report, after which the matter was transferred to CB-CID which filed the chargesheet; co-accused Asif (assigned role of knife) already enlarged on bail; counsel submitted no weapon recovered and no strong motive shown. The court found prima facie no cogent piece of evidence connecting the applicant with the offence, and considering nature of accusation, severity of punishment, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, granted bail without expressing any view on merits. Release ordered on personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount with conditions: (i) no tampering with prosecution evidence/intimidation of witnesses; (ii) undertaking not to seek adjournment when witnesses are present and presence on each fixed date personally or through counsel, absence inviting proceedings under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (iii) personal presence at opening of case, framing of charge and statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; (iv) upon misuse and failure to appear despite proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., proceedings under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. Sureties' identity, status and residence to be verified; breach permits the court below to cancel bail. Observations expressly confined to disposal of the bail application.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10523

¶2

Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 833 of 2025 Applicant :- Sarfaraz Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Cb.Cid, Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Pal Singh Yadav,Prathama Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶4

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

¶5

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 0317 of 2018 under sections 307 and 504 of IPC, P.S.- Gudamba District - Lucknow.

¶6

The 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 submits that in the present matter, the police has filed the final report though, subsequently, the matter was transferred to CB-CID for investigation whereafter, the chargesheet has been filed wherein, the applicant has cooperated. He submits that in fact one of the co-accused who is assigned the role of knife namely, Asif has already been enlarged on bail. He also submits that in fact no weapon is recovered and there is no strong motive shown so as to commit offence by the present applicant. He also submits that trial would take considerable period of time to be concluded and the applicant is a law-abiding citizen though, he was never involved in committing offence as there is no criminal history of the applicant and he is languishing in jail since 17.01.2025 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶7

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that after thorough investigation, it was found that the applicant was involved in committing offence and as such, he is not entitled for any relief.

¶8

Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.01.2025; the applicant has no previous criminal history; prima facie, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶9

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.

¶10

Let the applicant- Sarfaraz 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:-

¶11

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

¶12

(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;

¶13

(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

¶14

(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 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.

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 18.2.2025/Mayank

¶18

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

Sarfaraz v. State of U.P. Thru. Cb.Cid, Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarfaraz v. State of U.P. Thru. Cb.Cid, 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

Pappu Chauhan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Sugendra Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home U.P. Lko.

Rahul Dixit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Vijay Kumar Alias Bablu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sudhanshu Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home/Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another