Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 164008 (ALL)

MOHD. ILIYAS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO.

BAIL/8664/2025 · 2025-09-15

Subhash Vidyarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8664 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Shri Ramakar Shukla, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashok Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Santosh Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel for the victim and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.359 of 2025, under Sections 2/3 of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of FIR lodged by Inspector Incharge against the applicant and his two sons stating that during checking, maintaining peace in the area, maintaining safety and security of the Kawariyan and during investigation when he was patroling the locality on foot, he came to know that the accused persons have formed an organized criminal gang. However, the gang chart annexed with the FIR was prepared way back on 21.07.2025. It was approved by the nodal officer on 21.07.2025, by the Superintendent of Police on 04.08.2025 and by the District Magistrate also on the same date. 4. The fact that the gang chart had been prepared on 21.07..2025 and had been approved on 04.8.2025. The narration made in the FIR that the informant, Inspector came to know about the gang during patrolling on 05.08.2025, appears to be false. 5. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the gang chart mentions involvement of the applicant in two criminal cases, in both of which he has been granted bail. The applicant is involved in another criminal case and in that case too he has been granted bail. 6. The learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the bail application and he has submitted that the applicant has threatened another person for extracting money from him yesterday itself. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ramakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mohd. Iliyas .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. In response to the aforesaid allegation, learned counsel for the applicant stated that the applicant is languishing jail since 05.08.2025. The learned counsel for the complainant next submitted that the offence has been committed yesterday by the other members of the gang. 8. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that both the others members of the gang are also languishing in jail and the learned counsel for the complainant himself has stated that their bail applications are scheduled to be listed tomorrow and on the day after tomorrow. In these circumstances, the allegations that the applicant and the other members of his gang, who happened to be the applicant's sons, have committed some other offence yesterday appears to be baseless. 9. There is nothing on record which may give rise to a reasonable apprehension that the applicant may tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses or that the applicant will abscond and will not face the trial or that he is likely to commit any other offence in case he is released on bail. 10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 11. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant-Mohd. Iliyas be released on bail in the aforesaid case registered under Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the 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. September 15, 2025 KR BAIL No. 8664 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RABINDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench