MOHD. IRFAN @ BAHAJUDDIN v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO
BAIL/3357/2025 · 2025-04-22
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 135278 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 135278 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22568 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3357 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd. Irfan @ Bahajuddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Islam Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Mohd. Islam Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jayant Singh Tomar, learned Additional Government Advocate-I for the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 0042 of 2025, under Sections 69, 352, 351(2) B.N.S., registered at Police Station Ghazipur, District Lucknow. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 31.01.2025 against the applicant and two other persons Salman and Hashim on the basis of an application under Section 173 BNSS stating that a loving relationship had developed between the informant and the applicant and under the allurement of marrying her the applicant has been physically exploiting her for the past one year. The informant became pregnant about three months ago, whereupon at the exhortation of the co-accused persons the applicant deceitfully gave her some medicine causing her miscarriage and thereafter the applicant had declined to marry her. 4. In the statement of the informant recorded under Section 180 BNSS she stated that after an affinity developed between her and the applicant both of them had started living together and she got pregnant. 5. The informant declined to undergo medico legal examination. In her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS the informant stated that she is a widow aged about 28 years having a daughter. She also alleged that the applicant had taken away Rs.20,000/- and some jewelry and thereafter he declined to marry her. 6. The Investigating Officer recorded statements of some independent persons who stated that the applicant is a divorcee. The applicant and the informant used to live together lovingly but after some dispute arose in between them the F.I.R. has been lodged. The witnesses stated that they have not heard anything regarding some cash and jewelry having been taken away by the applicant. 7. In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. 8.
The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the prayer for bail and he has submitted that the allegations have been established during investigation and a charge sheet has already been submitted. 9. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the informant has herself stated that she is a 28 years old widow having a daughter and yet she made physical relations with the applicant without marriage; that the informant has declined to undergo medico legal examination; that the independent witnesses have not supported the F.I.R. allegations; that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 01.03.2025 and the investigation already stands concluded and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of
the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime. 10. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 11. Let the applicant-Mohd. Irfan @ Bahajuddin 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 following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 22.4.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench