Mohd. Mohsin Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10955

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 280 of 2025

Appellant :- Mohd. Mohsin Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Amit Kumar Singh,Virijendra Kumar Singh,Vivek Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the appellant is taken on record.

¶7

As per instruction of learned A.G.A. notice has been served on the complainant.

¶8

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 20.12.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Barabanki.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, as well as the learned AGA and perused the entire record.

¶10

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. Further submitted that the child said to be converted was handed over to the owner of the restaurant by co-accused for job and later on, the owner of restaurant converted the respondent (child) with other coaccused persons, therefore, there is no any specific allegation against the appellant to convert the child from Hindu to Muslim but it is general. There is no any criminal antecedent against the appellant. The Court below while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. Appellant is in jail since 06.12.2024. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffer from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.

¶11

On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶12

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully.

¶13

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is to be allowed.

¶14

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.

¶15

Let the appellant Mohd. Mohsin involved in Case Crime No. 1111 of 2024, under Sections 3(5) B.N.S. and Section 3/5(3) U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Act, 2021 and Section 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶16

The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶19

The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶20

The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶22

Order Date :- 20.2.2025 Anurag Singh

¶23

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

Mohd. Mohsin v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Mohsin v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

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

Smt. Sameena and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. U.P. andORS.

Upendra Nath Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. a.C.S./ Prin. Secy. (Home Deptt.) Lko.

Braj Kumar Shukla Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Bhagwati Prasad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Sectt. Home Lko. and Another

Smt Sheela Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Tej Bahadur Singh Vs State of U.P. and 13 Ors.