Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 109123 (ALL)

SHABANA KHAN ALIAS SHABANA BEGAM KHAN v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

BAILC/556/2024 · 2025-05-25

Krishan Pahal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89590 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 556 of 2024 Applicant :- Shabana Khan Alias Shabana Begam Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Km. Ashra,Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- Abhishek Krishna,Ritesh Kumar Singh Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. Supplementary counter affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the informant is taken on record. 2. Heard Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhishek Krishna, learned counsel for O.P. No.2, Sri Amit Kumar, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant does not proposes to file any rejoinder affidavit to the supplementary counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for O.P. No.2. 4. The present bail cancellation application has been filed for cancelling the bail granted to O.P. No.2, namely, Dr. Shoieb Alam, by this Court vide order dated 05.07.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.17428 of 2024 (Dr. Shoieb Alam vs. State of U.P. & Another) in Case Crime No.0026 of 2024, under Section 376(2)(n) of I.P.C., Police Station - Rail Bazar, District - Kanpur Nagar. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant/victim has stated that the O.P. No.2 has flouted the conditions imposed upon him in the impugned order dated 05.07.2024 as he subsequently assaulted the applicant/victim on 16.07.2024 by smashing her head on wall several times, as such, the FIR has been instituted on 05.08.2022. The O.P. No.2 has also moved an application before the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Kanpur Nagar wherein he has complained against the applicant for absenteeism and misuse of power by which he forced her to refrain from appearing in court, as such, the bail granted to the O.P. No.2 is liable to be set aside. 6. Learned counsel has further stated that subsequent to the said bail order, non-bailable warrant was issued against the O.P. No.2, as such, the bail granted to him is liable to be cancelled in light of the non-bailable warrant being issued against him. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 has vehemently opposed the bail cancellation application on the ground that the FIR, which was instituted against the O.P. No.2, is an effort of the victim to somehow put the O.P. No.2 behind the bars. The said FIR itself is delayed by about 20 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. In the said case, the final report has been submitted against the O.P. No.2 under the sections as mentioned in the FIR. There is no medical corroboration of the incident, as such, it is a clear cut case of misuse of process of law. 8. Learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 has placed much reliance upon the application moved by the O.P. No.2 against the victim before the B.S.A., Kanpur Nagar. It is argued that the said application was moved by him being a responsible citizen of the society against the victim and there is nothing in the said application which tantamounts to intimidation. It is also stated that the parties are at loggerheads with each other, who were in consensual relationship earlier on, as such, the instant bail cancellation application is liable to be rejected. 9. Learned counsel has further argued that as far as the non- bailable warrant issued against the O.P. No.2 on 22.10.2024 is concerned, the same has been recalled by the court concerned vide order dated 24.10.2024. 10. Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record and also considering the fact that two parties have fallen apart and are at loggerheads coupled by the fact as has been mentioned in the said application moved by the O.P. No.2 before the B.S.A., Kanpur and the said FIR lodged subsequent to the impugned bail order, I do not find it proper to cancel the bail granted to the O.P. No.2 vide order dated 05.07.2024. 11. Accordingly, the present bail cancellation application is hereby rejected. Order Date:- 26.5.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad