Mohd. Asraf @ Asraf Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:9883

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9885 of 2024

Applicant :- Mohd. Asraf @ Asraf Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Brij Bhushan Singh,Pranjal Apurva,Prashant Kumar Mishra,Sandeep Kumar Mishra,Shailendra Kumar,Sharvan Kumar Pandey

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶7

Supplementary Affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶8

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

¶9

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. 366 of 2024, under sections 319(2), 318(4) & 336(3) of the B.N.S. and section 66-D of the I.T. Act, Police Station-Rupaidiha, District-Bahraich.

¶10

As per the prosecution story, the first information report was lodged on 01-08-2024 against the present applicant including 4 other accused persons with the allegation that from their possession, the articles including Laptops, i- phones and mobile phones, sim cards of different companies and other incriminating articles, were recovered and when it was investigated, it was found that the applicant was involved in committing the offence.

¶11

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 added that though the applicant is allegedly detained by the SSB officials on 29-072024,but, he has been shown to be arrested on 01-08-2024. He next added that there is no independent public eye witness of the alleged recovery and further there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect

¶12

him in the instant matter. He submits that the screen shot, which is said to be recovered from the mobile phone, from the possession of the applicant, is not connected with any offence and on the basis of suspicion, the applicant has been implicated. He next submits that due to animosity of the SSB officials as the vehicle of the applicant was headon with the vehicle of the SSB officials, the applicant was detained and the first information report was lodged against him. He added that the applicant has two no previous criminal history, whereas, after his arrest, two cases have been lodged against him while connecting with some articles shown to be recovered in the recovery memo prepared by the police officials. Further submission is that the chargesheet has been filed in the month of September, 2024 and the cognizance has also been taken thereof by the Magistrate and thus, there is no possibility that the applicant would flee away from the investigation proceedings or he would tamper the evidences. Further submission is that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 01-08-2024 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.

¶13

Further submitted that the identically situated coaccused namely, Mohd. Arif @ Arif has already been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 06-02-2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9890 of 2024 and the applicant is seeking parity of the same.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that there are serious allegations against the applicant and as such, he is not entitled for any relief, but, he could not dispute the fact that the identically situated co-accused named above, has already been enlarged on bail by this court.

¶15

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 01-08-2024; the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the

¶16

applicant will flee away from the investigation proceedings or would tamper the evidences coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶17

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, 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.

¶18

Let the applicant- Mohd. Asraf @ Asraf , 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:-

¶19

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

¶20

(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;

¶21

(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

¶22

(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

¶23

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.

¶24

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.

¶25

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.

¶26

Order Date :- 14.2.2025 AKS

¶27

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Asraf @ Asraf v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Asraf @ Asraf v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Mohd. Usman Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Deptt. of Home and 3 Others

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

Sarvan @ Sharvan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

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

Ram Chandra and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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