Sharif and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16376 of 2026

Sharif And 2 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arvind Agrawal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 72

¶6

HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.

¶7

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 55 of 1989, under Sections 325, 308 of I.P.C., Police Station- North, District- Firozabad, during the pendency of the trial.

¶9

3. Learned counsel for the applicants contends that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. Initially, the First Information Report (FIR) was lodged for offences under Sections 147, 452, 323 IPC and the applicants were on bail in the said case. The proceedings were challenged before this Court. And this Court, by means of its order dated 23.07.1999 passed in Application u/s 482 No.2628 of 1999, had granted interim protection to the petitioners therein and the said order was then extended vide order dated 12.10.1999 till the next date of listing. Learned counsel contends that it appears that the application under Section 482 No. 2628 of 1999, referred to above, was dismissed on 30.11.2010. However, the applicants could not get the information regarding the said dismissal. On coming to know of the issuance of process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. against the applicants, the applicants filed their anticipatory bail application and finally their anticipatory bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 12.03.2026 passed in NABAIL No. 1407 of 2026. The applicants were granted time to appear before the concerned Court and apply for bail within four weeks, which they did. However, their bail applications were rejected. The applicants are old aged persons

¶10

BAIL No. 16376 of 2026

¶11

2

¶12

the applicant no. 1 is aged about 50 years and applicant nos. 2 and 3 are 63 years of age. The applicants have no criminal antecedents.

¶13

4. The learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and has contended that the applicants were absconders, which is also mentioned in the order of this Court refusing to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. The learned AGA has however not been able to point out any criminal antecedents of the applicants.

¶14

5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

¶15

6. Initially, the FIR was lodged for offences under Sections 147, 323 and 452 IPC. The applicants are stated to be on bail for the said offences. The applicants were granted interim relief in Application u/S 482 No. 2628 of 1999. The offences under Sections Section 325 and 308 IPC appear to have been subsequently added. The maximum punishment prescribed for the offences alleged against the applicants is seven years. The applicants are all stated to be old aged, with the applicant nos. 2 and 3 being senior citizens. The applicants are in jail since 06.04.2026. The trial against the applicants is not likely to conclude in the near future.

¶16

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

¶17

8. The bail application is allowed.

¶18

9. Let the applicants - Sharif, Shamshad and Aslam , involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶19

i. The applicants will not tamper with the evidence.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

iv. The applicants will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial Court, unless their personal appearance is exempted by the Court

¶23

BAIL No. 16376 of 2026

¶24

3

¶25

concerned.

¶26

10. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the trial Court will be at liberty to proceed to cancel their bail.

¶27

11. It is made clear that the applicants 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

12. 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 applicants.

¶29

13. The observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant bail application and shall not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the case.

¶30

(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)

¶31

May 14, 2026 Kushal

¶32

Digitally signed by :- KUSHAL AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sharif and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharif and 2 Others 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

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

Sharik vs State of U.P.

Ramesh and Another vs State of U.P.

Brahma @ Chunmun Vs State of U.P.

Rajeev Kumar vs State of U.P.

Ashutosh Tripathi vs State of U.P.