Zeeshan Ansari vs State of U.P. and Another

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. It has been pointed out that the notice has already been served upon the opposite party no.2.

¶13

This second criminal appeal has been filed by the learned counsel for the appellant under Section 14-A (2) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for setting aside the impugned order dated 1.12.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Gorakhpur and to release him in Case Crime No.715 of 2025, under Sections 191 (2), 115 (2), 351 (3) 352, 109 (1), 3 (5) B.N.S.S. and Section 3 (2) (V) , 3 (1) Da, Dha of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Ramgarhtal, District Gorakhpur.

¶14

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant-applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is general allegation against the appellant. No specific role has been assigned to the appellant. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the appellant or on his pointing out. The appellant has not committed the alleged offence. The appellant has no concern with the alleged incident. False allegation has been made against the appellant. There is no cogent evidence against the appellant. It has further contended that co accused namely, Phoola Nishad @ Vishwakarma and Prayumn Nishad have already been granted bail by this Court, copies of the bail order is annexed to the criminal appeal. The appellant is in jail since 22.10.2025.

¶15

On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said fact.

¶16

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully.

¶17

CRLA No. 11503 of 2025

¶18

2

¶19

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail.

¶20

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.

¶21

Let the appellant Zeeshan Ansari, involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence.

¶26

(v) The appellant 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.

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before the competent Court.

¶31

As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant 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 observation made in this order.

¶32

January 16, 2026 A.

¶33

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

¶34

Digitally signed by :- AFAQ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Zeeshan Ansari v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zeeshan Ansari v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Smt Warija Pandey vs State of U.P. and Another

Vishal vs State of U.P. and Another

Sonu Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Poonam vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Suhel vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Ruby vs State of U.P. and 8 Others