Furkan Ali and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

A prayer for bail has been made by the appellants in this criminal appeal, which has been filed against the judgement and orders dated 21/22.08.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Lakhimpur Kheri in Sessions Trial No. 368 of 2011 (State Versus Ayub and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 3919 of 2007 under Sections 308/504/506 IPC, Police Station-Kotwali Sadar, District-Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶17

The submissions of learned counsel for the appellants/applicants is that the appellants are innocent persons and have been falsely been implicated in the case.

¶18

It is further stated that a perusal of the judgment of conviction would indicate that appellants/applicants were not previously convicted and therefore the benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (in short 'Act of 1958'), ought to have been provided to the appellants/applicants and therefore, the trial court in not granting the benefit of the Act of 1958, is committed error in law and fact both.

¶19

CRLA No. 3289 of 2025

¶20

2

¶21

It is also stated that a perusal of the statement of injured witness/Dhaniram (P.W.1), considered by the trial court for convicting the appellants for the offence under Section 308 IPC, would indicate that without premeditation of mind and on the spur of moment, the incident occurred therefore, conviction the appellants for the offence under Section 308 IPC is not justified.

¶22

It is further stated that the prosecution witness of the fact namely Awadesh Kumar/P.W.2 was declared hostile and trial court ought to have considered the statement(s) of Awadesh Kumar/P.W.2 and Ram Raj Singh/P.W.3 and opinion of the Doctor concerned, according to whom the head injury could be sustained on account of falling down on hard and blunt surface, while convicting the appellants for the offence under Section 308 IPC and in not considering the same the trial court has committed error of law and fact both.

¶23

It is further stated that appellants were on bail during trial and have not misused the said liberty.

¶24

It is further submitted that appellants, having no criminal history, is languishing in jail since 21.08.2025 and the possibility of final hearing in the instant appeal in near future is bleak.

¶25

In these circumstances, the appellants/applicants are entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in disposal of present appeal.

¶26

Learned Counsel for the side opposite has opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

¶27

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record as well as totality of fact and circumstances as also submission of counsel for the applicants/appellants to the effect that while on bail, the appellants/applicants would not commit any crime/offence and would co-operate in the disposal of the appeal as also the submissions related to judgment under appeal and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant/appellants are entitled to be released on bail till the outcome of the instant appeal.

¶28

Accordingly, the application for bail is allowed. The sentence imposed by the trial court shall remain suspended during pendency of present appeal, qua the present applicant/appellant.

¶29

Let the applicants-appellants, namely, Furkan Ali and Irfan involved in aforesaid sessions trial be released on bail subject to payment of complete fine within 15 days from the date of his release and on

¶30

CRLA No. 3289 of 2025

¶31

3

¶32

furnishing his personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to following conditions;

¶33

(i) The appellants-applicants will cooperate in the disposal of appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment.

¶34

(ii) The appellants-applicants will not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶35

As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the trial court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal.

¶36

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶37

(Saurabh Lavania,J.)

¶38

October 13, 2025

¶39

Jyoti/-

¶40

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

Furkan Ali and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Furkan Ali and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Similar cases

Inder Raj Lamba Vs Smt. Neeru Seth Thru. Her Husband and Attorney Chandra Kumar S

Prema @ Srimati vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko.

Ashok Kumar and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Pushkar @ Pushpendra Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko

Laxmi Kant Mishra Vs Mandir Manohar Lal Trust Aishbaagh Fatak Chauraha Lko.and Ors.

Smt. Preeti Tandon vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another