MUEEN KHAN v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO.
BAIL/12545/2024 · 2025-12-10
Karunesh Singh Pawar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 203201 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 203201 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12545 of 2024 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 06–07.09.2024, the informant’s minor daughter, aged about 14 years, was enticed away by the applicant, and while leaving, she also took certain gold and silver jewellery with her. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in custody since 07.09.2024. It is further submitted that the victim and two prosecution witnesses have already been examined before the trial court, and PW-1, PW-2, and PW-3 have been declared hostile, with none supporting the prosecution version. It is argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the facts stated by learned counsel for the applicant. Perused the record, so also the statements of PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3 which are on record. Considering that three prosecution witnesses, including the victim, have Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gyan Singh, Awadhesh Kumar Pal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mueen Khan .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)
been examined; the applicant is in custody since 07.09.2024 without any criminal antecedents; there appears to be no likelihood of tampering with the evidence; and in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1693, this Court finds it a fit case for granting bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Mueen Khan, involved in Case Crime No- 307/2024, U/S- 137(2), 87, 316(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Madhauganj, District- Hardoi, be released on bail in the aforementioned 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. Any other condition(s) which the trial court/concerned court may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. December 10, 2025 R.C.
BAIL No. 12545 of 2024 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench