Junaid vs State of U.P.

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.329 of 2025, under Sections 140(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station- Alapur, DistrictBudaun.

¶10

The Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has not been named in the First Information Report. The applicant and the co-accused are stated to have abducted the victim and demanded a ransom of Rs.50 lakhs. The victim, however, has not been recovered from the possession of the applicant or the co-accused. No allegation of sexual assault has been made against the applicant in the statement of the victim. The Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the similarly situated co-accused viz. Nigar and Ibne Ali @ Shahrukh have been granted regular bail by this Court vide its orders dated 30.04.2026 and 07.05.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 3934 of 2026 ( Nigar Vs. State of U.P. ) and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 6624 of 2026 ( Ibne Ali @ Shahrukh Vs. State of U.P. ), respectively. The case of the applicant is at par with that of the co-accused. He further contends that the applicant has a criminal history of two cases and one being a case registered as Case Crime No.88 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 323, 504,

¶11

BAIL No. 15973 of 2026

¶12

2

¶13

506 I.P.C., Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 3/4 of Muslim Women (Marriage and Protection) Act, Police Station- Alapur, District- Budaun. The applicant is on bail in the said case vide order dated 26.09.2025 passed by the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.02, Budaun. The applicant is in jail since 28.10.2025.

¶14

The Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, has opposed the prayer for grant of bail, however, could not disputed the fact that the similarly situated co-accused has already been enlarged on bail.

¶15

I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the parties and perused the material brought on the record.

¶16

Similarly situated co-accused viz. Nigar and Ibne Ali @ Shahrukh have been granted regular bail by this Court vide its orders dated 30.04.2026 and 07.05.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 3934 of 2026 ( Nigar Vs. State of U.P. ) and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 6624 of 2026 ( Ibne Ali @ Shahrukh Vs. State of U.P. ), respectively. The applicant is in jail since 28.10.2025. The victim was not recovered from the possession of the applicant. The applicant has explained his criminal history satisfactorily.

¶17

Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case, prima facie , a case for bail is made out.

¶18

The bail application is allowed .

¶19

Let the accused-applicant- Junaid , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶20

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶21

ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶22

iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶23

BAIL No. 15973 of 2026

¶24

3

¶25

iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.

¶26

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶27

It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.

¶28

It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant.

¶29

(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)

¶30

May 12, 2026 Sachin

¶31

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Junaid v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Junaid v. State of U.P.

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

Jwala Prasad and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Lavkush Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Sushant Sharma vs State of U.P.

Sunil Kushwaha @ Sunil Maury vs State of U.P.

Sharik vs State of U.P.

Ramesh and Another vs State of U.P.