Mohammad Aleem Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:12351

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 290 of 2025

Appellant :- Mohammad Aleem Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vishwa Nath Singh,Shiv Kumar Yadav

¶5

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶7

Heard.

¶8

The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant seeking following reliefs:-

¶9

"WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned order dated 28.10.2024, passed by the court of learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Barabanki, in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 3512/2024, moved by the appellant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. C-26 of 2006, Under Section-376 I.P.C. and Section-3(2) V of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Safdarganj, DistrictBarabanki, allowing the instant criminal appeal, in the interest of justice.

¶10

It is further most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant the appellant on anticipatory bail in Case crime/ F.I.R. No. C-26 of 2006, Under Section-376 I.P.C. and Section-3(2) V of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Safdarganj, District-Barabanki, during the pendency of his trial."

¶11

In pursuance of earlier order, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barabanki, vide letter dated 01.02.2025, informs that notice is already served on the complainant of the present case. Despite service of the notice, none appears on behalf of the complainant. Therefore, this appeal for anticipatory bail is being decided with the assistance of learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶12

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was falsely implicated in the present case. After detailed investigation, no evidence was found against the appellant, hence, his name was dropped. He further submits that the

¶13

charge-sheet was submitted against co-accused- Ramsaran Kahar for the offense u/s 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act and then trial was proceeded against him. He further submits that in victim's statement, she stated that the appellant was also present at the time of the incident and he closed her sister's mouth during that incident. He next submits that an application u/s 319 Cr.P.C. was also filed and learned trial Court passed summoning order without examining the sister of the victim and without considering this fact that after detailed investigation, the name of the appellant was dropped. He lastly submits that all these facts were not considered by learned trial Court at the time of deciding anticipatory bail application of the appellant, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appellant is entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the appellant and submits that the name of the appellant was dropped by the Investigating Officer after investigation, and thereafter, he was summoned. However, he does not dispute the fact that as per the material available, sister of the victim was not examined by learned trial Court at the time of passing the summoning order u/s 319 Cr.P.C.

¶15

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order as well as material annexed with the appeal, it is evident that the appellant was implicated in the F.I.R., thereafter, his name was dropped by the Investigating Officer and then chargesheet was submitted against another person. The victim was examined and in her statement, she made allegations against the appellant for closing mouth of her sister during the incident, but her sister was not examined. All these facts were not considered by the trial Court in correct perspective. Therefore, this appeal is allowed . The impugned order dated 28.10.2024 passed by the court of learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Barabanki in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 3512/2024 is hereby set aside . The appellant is entitled for anticipatory bail with direction to furnish personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties before the trial Court within a period of one month with the following conditions:-

¶16

(i) The appellant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶17

(ii) 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.

¶18

(iii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

Order Date :- 27.2.2025

¶20

Arpan

¶21

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

Mohammad Aleem v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Aleem v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Molhe and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Master Meet Alias Sarthak Thru. Mother Arti Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and 3 Others

Sangam Lal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

P.P. Pandey (Parmatma Prasad Pandey) vs Sri Masoom Ali Sarwar, M.D., U.P. State Road Transport Corp. Lko.

Dr. Rajendra Lal Srivastava and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy./Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Agriculture Education/Research Lko. and 5 Others

Karan Lal Hans vs Shri Sundeep Pal Executive Director Pay Commission New Delhi and Others