Allowed

Smt Jamilan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Nov 2025CRLA/11598/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the appellents convicted under Sections 363 and 366 IPC, citing their advanced age and the fact that they were relatives of the co-accused. Bail was granted on personal bonds with sureties upon depositing 50% of the fine.

What did the court decide?

Appellants released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties; realization of half fine stayed.

Smt Jamilan and 2 Others vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 11598 of 2025

¶3

Smt Jamilan And 2 Others

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

			.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Arvind Kumar Srivastava	Sahu,	Praveen Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 53

¶9

HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.

¶10

In Re: Criminal Appeal

¶11

Admit.

¶12

Trial court record has been received in Criminal Appeal No.10861 of 2025.

¶13

List and connect with Criminal Appeal No.10861 of 2025..

¶14

In Ref: Criminal Misc. (Suspension of Sentence) Application No.02 of 2025

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶16

The present criminal appeal u/s 415(2) B.N.S.S. has been preferred with prayer to allow the appeal and set aside the judgment and order dated 06.11.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court) Bareilly passed in Session Trial No.420 of 2013 (State vs. Shareef and others) and in Session Trial No.595 of 2014 (State vs. Jamalin and others) arising out of Case Crime No.700 of 2012, under Section 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station Devraniyan, District Bareilly. It is further prayed that during the pendency of the instant appeal, the appellants may be released on bail, suspend the sentence and the realization of fine imposed against him may kindly be stayed.

¶17

It is submitted that in this case appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated for being mother aged about 65 years, father aged about 70 years

¶18

CRLA No. 11598 of 2025

¶19

¶20

and mama aged about 50 years of the co-accused Imran who is said to have enticed away the victim and committed rape with her. Further submitted that learned trial court did not consider the evidence on record in proper manner but convicted and sentenced the appellants for a period of 4 years rigorous imprisonment. The appellants are in jail since 04.11.2025 . It is also submitted that the appeal is also likely to take some time for final disposal, therefore, requested to release them on bail during the pendency of present criminal appeal.

¶21

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application and supported the trial court's judgement.

¶22

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in particular the nature of offence and evidence adduced by the parties, and the appellants being mother aged about 65 years, father aged about 70 years and mama aged 50 years of the co-accused Imran and the fact that hearing of the appeal is not possible in near future, without further commenting on merit of the case, I am inclined to release the appellants on bail.

¶23

Let appellants - Smt. Jamilan, Shareef & Majeed be released on bail during the pendency of this appeal on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶24

On acceptance of bail and personal bonds, the lower court shall transmit photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record.

¶25

The realization of half of the fine awarded to the appellant shall also remain stayed during the pendency of the appeal.

¶26

The appellant would be entitled to get the benefit of this order only after depositing 50 % amount of fine.

¶27

The party shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by representative/counsel of the appellant (s) along with a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked

¶28

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court

¶29

CRLA No. 11598 of 2025

¶30

¶31

Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶32

December 19, 2025 Ashok Gupta

¶33

(Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.)

¶34

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Jamilan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Jamilan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Alias Mulla vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohammad Haleem and 9 Others vs the New India Assurance Company Ltd. and 2 Others

Shakeel and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Dr. Vikas Yadav vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dr. Vikas Yadav vs State of Up and 3 Others

Abhay Pratap Singh @ Manoj Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others