Shoaib Suleman Shaikh Vs State of U.P.

Heard Shri Mujeev Khan, learned advocate holding the brief for the accused-applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶10

This bail application has been moved on behalf of the accused-applicant/ Shoaib Suleman Shaikh, for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 689 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 140(3) and 143(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Tajganj, District Agra, during pendency of trial.

¶11

Learned counsel for accused-applicant, while pressing the bail application, submits that, the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case and has not committed any offence, as alleged by the prosecution. It is further submitted that, the applicant was not named in the first information report of this case and his name has surfaced during the course of investigation. It is alleged in the first information report of this case that, an unknown person has enticed away the daughter of the informant, aged about 4 years. No allegation has been levelled against the applicant in the first information report. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that, the victim, in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has stated that, some Baba, wearing white kurta- pajama has taken away her with him, however, the said Baba has not beaten her, nor anything wrong has been done to her. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that, the applicant has nothing to do with the victim, nor he has enticed away the victim and his name has been dragged in this case by the Police because of a hot talk having taken place in between

¶12

BAIL No. 1169 of 2026

¶13

2

¶14

the police and the applicant, while the applicant was on a visit to Taj Mahal, Agra. He further submits that, the accused-applicant is languishing in jail in this matter, since 16.10.2025, without having any criminal antecedents and there is no likelihood that, the accused-applicant, after release on bail, may flee from the process of law or will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of State opposes the prayer for bail of the applicant on the ground that, the applicant was seen with the victim in the CCTV cameras installed at booking counters of Railway Station, Agra Cantt and the minor victim has been recovered from the possession of the applicant from Subhash Palace, North-west, Delhi, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

Having considered the rival contentions of the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that, the applicant was seen with the victim in the CCTV cameras installed at booking counters of Railway Station, Agra Cantt and the minor victim has been recovered from the possession of the applicant from Subhash Palace, North-west, Delhi. Thus, having regard to the evidence available on record against the applicant and his complicity in the crime, as much as the accused- applicant has lured an innocent child (girl) with him for some ulterior motive, I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail. Hence, the bail application moved on behalf of applicant - Shoaib Suleman Shaikh is hereby rejected.

¶17

Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case.

¶18

April 23, 2026 Gurpreet Singh

¶19

(Harvir Singh,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- GURPREET SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shoaib Suleman Shaikh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shoaib Suleman Shaikh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep @ Chhote Vs State of U.P.

Azeem Husain Vs State of U.P.

Bhola and Another Vs State of U.P.

Junaid Vs State of Up

Faisal vs State of U.P.

Tavish Raza Vs State of U.P.