Mohd. Taha @ Tahaam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

By means of this application, the applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 82 of 2024, under sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 120-B of IPC and under Section 4/25/27 Arms Act, Police Station Bazar Khala DistrictLucknow is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶14

The facts of this case are that on 12.05.2024, an FIR has been lodged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 120-B of IPC and under Section 4/25/27 Arms Act against six named accused persons including the present applicant and three to four unknown persons alleging therein that the named accused persons alongwith three to four unknown persons on 11.05.2024 at around 9 PM had attacked and killed the brother of the informant by knife. Earlier also, they had tried to kill his brother due to old enmity.

¶15

It is further submitted that there is no eye-witness to the incident.

¶16

It is further submitted that there are seven witnesses of fact and out of which four witnesses have turned hostile and remaining three witnesses have stated in their statement that they have not witnessed the alleged incident.

¶17

The applicant has a criminal history of three cases wherein in one case Police has filed final report. In another case, this Court has extended the

¶18

BAIL No. 2383 of 2026

¶19

2

¶20

benefit of section 41 of Cr.P.C. to the applicant and the last case has been lodged under the provisions of Gangsters Act in pursuance of the present case, wherein the applicant has falsely been implicated. The applicant is in jail since 15.05.2024.

¶21

It is further submitted that the following named co-accused persons have approached this Court wherein this Court has granted bail to them. Photocopy of the said bail orders have been provided to this Court by learned counsel for the applicant during the course of argument, which is taken on record. The relevant details of the bail orders are being mentioned hereinbelow:-

¶22

a. Mohd. Kareem @ Parvez has approached this Court by filing Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 816 of 2026 wherein this Court has granted bail vide order dated 12.03.2026.

¶23

b.Mohd. Jamal Haroon @ Harish has approached this Court by filing Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11849 of 2025 wherein this Court has granted bail considering the bail order of named co-accused person Mohd. Kareem @ Parvez, vide order dated 13.03.2026.

¶24

c.Mohd. Zubair has approached this Court by filing Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1951 of 2026 wherein this Court has granted bail considering the bail order of named co-accused person Mohd. Kareem @ Parvez and Mohd. Jamal Haroon @ Harish vide order dated 18.03.2026.

¶25

d .Mohd. Shahab has approached this Court by filing Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1966 of 2026 wherein this Court has granted bail considering the bail order of named co-accused person Mohd. Kareem @ Parvez, Mohd. Jamal Haroon @ Harish and Mohd. Zubair, vide order dated 19.03.2026.

¶26

e. Juvenile X has approached this Court by filing Criminal Revision No. 131 of 2025 wherein this Court has granted bail vide its order dated 17.09.2025.

¶27

The order of this Court dated 19.03.2026 whereby this Court has granted bail to co-accused Mohd. Shahab is being reproduced hereinbelow:-

¶28

" 1. On a query being put, the learned AGA submitted that he has complete instructions in the matter, as such, this Court proceeded to hear the

¶29

BAIL No. 2383 of 2026

¶30

3

¶31

application seeking bail on merits.

¶32

2. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶33

3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in FIR/Case Crime No.82 of 2024, under Sections- 147, 148, 149, 302, 120-B, P.S.-Bazar Khala, District-Lucknow.

¶34

4. While pressing the application for bail, the learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case.

¶35

5. It is also stated that co-accused persons namely Mohd. Kareem alias Parvez, Mohd. Jamal Haroon alias Harish and Mohd. Zubair have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 12.03.2026, 13.03.2026 and 18.03.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.816 of 2026, 11849 of 2026 and 1951 of 2026. The relevant portion of the order dated 13.03.2026 passed in the case of co-accused/Mohd. Jamal Haroon alias Harish reads as under:-

¶36

"4. It is stated that co-accused namely Mohd. Kareem @ Parvez has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 12.03.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.816 of 2026. The relevant portion of the order dated 06.11.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.10110 of 2025 reads as under:-

¶37

"1. Heard Sri Riyaz Ahmad, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Sinha, the learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Kunwar Bahadur Singh, the learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.

¶38

2. Counter affidavits filed by the State and the complainant are taken on record.

¶39

3. This is second application seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 82/2024, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 120-B IPC, Police Station Bazar Khala, District Lucknow.

¶40

4. The first bail application No. 9431/2024 was rejected by means of an order dated 29.04.2025. This second application has been moved on the ground that subsequent to rejection of the first bail application, 7 witnesses

¶41

BAIL No. 2383 of 2026

¶42

4

¶43

of fact have been examined, 4 of whom have turned hostile and other 3 have stated that they have not witnessed the incident.

¶44

5. The applicant is languishing in jail since 29.05.2024 and he is aged 62 years.

¶45

6. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶46

7. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

¶47

8. Let the applicant- Mohd. Kareem @ Parvez be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to the following conditions: -"

¶48

5. It is further stated that the applicant is in judicial custody since 15.05.2025. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty of bail and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely bleak. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶49

6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the above contentions made by the learned counsel for the accusedapplicant.

¶50

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties including which are related to allegations made in the FIR and keeping in mind the period of incarceration as also that co-accused persons has already been released on bail by this Court as also chance of conclusion of trial in near future and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶51

8. Let the applicant-Mohd. Jamal Haroon @ Harish be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned forthwith. Applicant is also directed to furnish two reliable sureties, out of which one shall be the family member of the accused-applicant each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- "

¶52

BAIL No. 2383 of 2026

¶53

5

¶54

6. It is further stated that the applicant is in judicial custody since 29.05.2024. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty of bail and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely bleak. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶55

7. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the above contentions made by the learned counsel for the accusedapplicant.

¶56

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties including which are related to allegations made in the FIR and co-accused persons, named above, have already been released on bail by this Court and keeping in mind the period of incarceration as also the chance of conclusion of trial in near future and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶57

9. Let the applicant- Mohd. Shahab be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties, out of which one should be of family member/close relative, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions :-

¶58

(i) The applicant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial.

¶59

(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶60

(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s).

¶61

(iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence.

¶62

(v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶63

(vi) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel.

¶64

BAIL No. 2383 of 2026

¶65

6

¶66

(vii) The applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court.

¶67

(viii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶68

10. In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law

¶69

11. As this order relates to enlargement of the applicant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order.

¶70

12. Application is disposed of. "

¶71

On the other hand, learned AGA on the basis of instructions received and Shri Kunwar Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for grant of bail but they are unable to dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as the fact that the other named co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court having role as alleged against the present applicant.

¶72

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the material available on record, it is found that the other named co-accused persons have been granted bail by the coordinate bench of this Court on the ground that there were seven witnesses of fact and after examination four of them were declared hostile and remaining three witnesses have stated in their statement that they have not seen the alleged incident and after considering the said ground, the bail has been granted; there is a general allegations against all the named co-accused persons as it has been alleged against the applicant and those persons have been granted bail by this Court thus, it is found that it is a fit case in which the applicant may be enlarged on bail on parity.

¶73

Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶74

Let the applicant Mohd. Taha @ Tahaam be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:-

¶75

(i) The applicant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial.

¶76

BAIL No. 2383 of 2026

¶77

7

¶78

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶79

(iii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es).

¶80

(iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence.

¶81

(v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶82

(vi) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel.

¶83

(vii) The applicant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court.

¶84

(viii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶85

In case of default of above conditions it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶86

As this order relates to enlargement of the applicant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observations made in this order.

¶87

April 3, 2026

¶88

Ashish

¶89

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶90

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Taha @ Tahaam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Taha @ Tahaam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Sunny @ Sanjay Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Tajram Yadav @ Jaicky vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Jeeshan Ahmad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Sunil Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 4 Others .

Dayashanker vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Ravindra Upadhyay vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.