Ankit Adim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10198

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 411 of 2025

Appellant :- Ankit Adim Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Narendra Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Vakalatnama filed by Shri Alok Kumar Mishra, Advocate on behalf of complainant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present appeal has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 23.01.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sitapur in Bail Application No.17/2025 arising out of Case Crime No.305/2024 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police StationMishrit, District- Sitapur.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the appellant was only a marginal witness in the alleged sale deed and he identified the purchaser only. He further submits that it is undisputed fact that the purchaser has already lodged FIR bearing No.297 of 2024, under sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC at PS- Mishrit, District- Sitapur on 24.09.2024 against the so-called impostors, namely Sakatu, Ankit Adim, Laxmikant, Monu Kumar, Munshilal and Manoj who have sold out the property of case in question.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant does not have any previous criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 06.01.2025. But all these facts were not considered by the trial court while passing the impugned order, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Learned AGA as well as Learned counsel for the complainant opposes the prayer of appellant but they do not dispute this fact

¶12

that the appellant is only a marginal witness and he has only identified the purchaser.

¶13

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of appeal as well as other relevant documents; it is evident that the appellant is only a marginal witness. He has no previous criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 06.01.2025. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that learned trial court failed to consider the aforesaid aspects, hence, the aforesaid impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶14

Resultantly, in the above facts and circumstances of the case, the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, hence, the present appeal has substance, and it is accordingly allowed , and the impugned order dated 23.01.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sitapur is hereby set aside.

¶15

Let the appellant- Ankit Adim 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:-

¶16

(i) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶17

(ii) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their 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.

¶18

(iii) In case, the appellant 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 the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(iv) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for 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

¶20

liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the aforesaid condition, it shall become the ground of cancellation of bail.

¶22

Order Date :- 17.2.2025 V. Sinha

¶23

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

Ankit Adim v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit Adim v. State of U.P. Thru. 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

Zehra Khan Thru. Her Next Friend Shamim Khan @ Mohammad Shamim Khan (Father) vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Shyam Manohar Tripathi vs Sri Anil Kumar-Iii, I.a.S, Addl. Chief Secy. Panchyati Raj Deptt. Lko.

Avadhesh Singh @ Sipahi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Mukesh Prasad Gupta vs Vishak G, Distt Magistrate, Lko.

Naseem vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko and Another

Kartik Thru. His Mother Smt. Anshika Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko and 4 Others