Shamim Ahmad vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1617 of 2025

Shamim Ahmad

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Nadeem Murtaza, Anjani Kumar Mishra, Ankit Tiwari, Suryansh Singh Suryavanshi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 15

¶8

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶9

1. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.5002 of 2025 now registered as 0002 of 2025 under sections 316(5), 318(4), 61(2) BNS, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, now registered at Anti corruption Gonda, district/Unit Gonda, now registered at ACO UP.

¶10

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶11

3. It is alleged in the prosecution case that on a complaint dated 4.3.2018 regarding the applicant having involved in corrupt practices in operation of 350 madarsas and salary of 800 fake teachers, an enquiry was made and it was found that the co-accused Amarjeet Singh, the then District Minority Welfare Officer in collusion with the applicant had violated rules and got madarsas registered. It is further alleged that under the Madarsa Modermisation Scheme, list of 357 files was forwarded to Directorate of Minority Welfare, Gonda, which was enquired and it was found that only 58 such files could be matched with the dispatch register and on physical verification, only 126 madarsas were not found to exist. During enquiry, the applicant was asked to provide the related documents but he did not do so. It is also alleged that the accused persons have committed irregularities in recognition of madarsas etc.

¶12

NABAIL No. 1617 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that more or less on similar set of facts, earlier a first information report No.167 of 2024 was registered at police station Kotwali Nagar, district Gonda under section 409 I.P.C. against the applicant on the direction of Minority Welfare Department, Gonda vide Annexure No.3. The allegation in that first information report is that the applicant has not provided files to the Anti Corruption Organisation for the purpose of enquiry. In this first information report, apart from the allegation regarding not providing files to the Anti Corruption Organisation, some other allegation has been made, however, regarding the same set of transaction. The first information report is related to the incident which took place in the year 2015. It is submitted that the applicant has cooperated in the enquiry.

¶15

Earlier, on similar frivolous allegation, complaints were preferred against the applicant which were enquired into by the SDM, Gonda who has submitted report dated 2.6.2016 to the ADM, Finance & Revenue, Gonda who vide his letter dated 12.6.2016 informed the District Magistrate, Gonda that the complaints are false. Copy of the letter dated 12.6.2016 has been filed as Annexure No.19 to the bail application.

¶16

Similar complaint was again made against the applicant by one Aizaaz Ahnmad. The complaint was enquired into by the Committee constituted by the District Magistrate, Gonda and a report dated 24.6.2016 was submitted, in which nothing incriminating was found against the applicant.The report has been filed as Annexure No.20 to the bail application. The same Aizaaz Ahmad has preferred an application under section 156(3) CrPC against the applicant and the co-accused Amar Jeet Singh regarding committing several illegalities which are also subject matter of this first information report. The application under section 156(3) CrPC was allowed and case crime No.702 of 2016 was registered under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 I.P.C. at police station Kotwali Nagar, district Gonda against the applicant and the co-accused, named above. The allegations against the applicant in the first information report were investigated and final report was filed exonerating the applicant. Specific pleading in this regard has been made in para 41 of the bail application.

¶17

NABAIL No. 1617 of 2025

¶18

3

¶19

It is submitted that the applicant is 59 years old government servant. The offences are triable by Magistrate. Earlier, the applicant was granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 22.1.2025 (Annexure-23) in case crime No.167 of 2024. It is submitted that the said case crime was registered more or less on same set of allegations.

¶20

It is also submitted that aggrieved by multiple first information reports regarding the same cause of action, he approached this Court by filing Crl. Misc. W.P. No.1795 of 2025 Shamim Ahmad versus State of U.P. and others which was decided vide order dated 5.3.2025 by this court and the applicant was directed to represent before the S.P. Gonda who was directed to pass appropriate orders. The order has been filed as Anenxure No.24 to the bail application. In compliance of the order dated 5.3.2025, a representation dated 17.3.2025 was preferred , however, it is pending and the order of this court has not been complied with by S.P. Gonda.

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation. He shall abide by the conditions imposed upon the applicant. The applicant has explained criminal history of three cases in para 64 of the bail application.

¶22

5. Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer made by applicant's counsel.

¶23

6. Issue notice to respondent No.2.

¶24

7. List on 10.12.2025. In the meantime, learned A.G.A. shall file objections/counter affidavit.

¶25

8. Considering the above aspects of the matter, the fact that multiple first information reports/complaints have been lodged against the applicant regarding the same incident, the applicant is a government servant, the offences are triable by Magistrate, the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he will cooperate in the investigation, perusal of the record, as also the judgments in Arnab Ranjan Goswami versus Union of India (2020)14 SCC 12, T.T. Antony versus State of Kerala (2001)6 SCC 181 and Amish Devgan versus Union of India (2021)1 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant

¶26

NABAIL No. 1617 of 2025

¶27

4

¶28

protection to the applicant.

¶29

9. In view of the above, as an interim protection, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer/S.H.O.

¶30

The applicant shall report to the investigating officer within ten days from today. The investigating officer shall enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail, as directed above.

¶31

10. The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and shall make himself available as and when he is required by the investigating officer and he will not influence the witnesses. The applicant shall not leave India sans previous permission of the Court.

¶32

In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to proceed in accordance with law/ to move application for vacation of this order.

¶33

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶34

November 4, 2025

¶35

kkb/

¶36

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shamim Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shamim Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mithilesh Kumar Yadava @ Mithilesh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiv Dayal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Gulam @ Lamboo and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Adhin Vishwakarma vs State of U.P. and Another

Abbas Raja Jafari @ Abbasi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Mahendra @ Sonu vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.