Ibne Ali @ Shahrukh Vs State of U.P.

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No.329 of 2025, under Sections 140(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of B.N.S. & 3/25(1-B)(a) of Arms Act P.S. Alapur, District-Budaun, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some ulterior motive. Allegation of demand of Rs.50,00,000/- has been leveled against the applicant- accused and the victim was stated to be recovered from Mumbai but neither the place of recovery of the victim and from whose possession the victim was recovered, have not been disclosed nor anything relating to present case has been recovered either from the possession of applicant or on his pointing out. He next submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.10.2025 i.e. for last more than six months. He lastly submitted that almost similarly placed coaccused Nigar has been released on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.04.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3934 of 2026, therefore, applicant may also be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

¶12

BAIL No. 6624 of 2026

¶13

2

¶14

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.

¶15

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, and submissions of learned counsel for the parties; without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.

¶16

Let applicant, Ibne Ali @ Shahrukh be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶17

i. The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶18

ii. He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶19

iii. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶20

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶22

(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)

¶23

May 7, 2026

¶24

KK Patel

¶25

Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ibne Ali @ Shahrukh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ibne Ali @ Shahrukh 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

Mitthu Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Archana Maddheshiya vs State of U.P. and Another

Saddam Husain and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anchal Sharma vs State of U.P.

Indresh Singh Chauhan vs State of U.P. and Another