Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 240 (ALL)

Shafeeq Alias Gatua v. State of U. P.

2025-02-06

SAMEER JAIN

body2025
JUDGMENT : Sameer Jain, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Irshad Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 185 of 2024, under Sections 395, 412 IPC, Police Station Milak, District Rampur during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that initially FIR of the present case was lodged under Section 392 IPC against unknown persons but during investigation case has been converted under Sections 395, 412 IPC. 5. He further submits, as per allegation, during investigation applicant has been arrested along with co-accused Danish and Intekab Ali and from their possession the alleged looted money Rs. 2,70,000/- were recovered but after considering the entire facts of the case co-accused Danish and Intekab Ali have been released on bail by this Court vide orders dated 05.08.2024 and 04.09.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.27670 of 2024 and 24131 of 2024 respectively and on facts case of applicant is at par with them. 6. He further submits, however, apart from the present case applicant is having previous criminal history of ten other cases but his entire criminal history has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed in support of instant bail application and out of ten cases in three cases he has already been acquitted. He further submits, only due to previous criminal history, applicant has been made accused in the present matter during investigation. 7. He further submits, when applicant was arrested then he also challaned in other two cases and this fact again shows that police is highly inimical with the applicant. 8. He further submits, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 10.05.2024 i.e. for almost nine months. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. He further submits, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 10.05.2024 i.e. for almost nine months. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. From the record, it reflects that FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown persons with regard to robbery and during investigation when applicant and two other co-accused namely Danish and Intekab Ali were arrested then from their possession alleged looted Rs. 2,70,000/- were recovered but after considering the entire facts of the case in detail, both co-accused have been released on bail by this Court. 12. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of ten other cases but considering the criminal history which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that only due to previous criminal history police implicated him in the present matter during investigation, cannot be ruled out at this stage. 13. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 10.05.2024 i.e. for almost nine months. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 16. Let the applicant- Shafeeq @ Gatua 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 the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 17. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 18. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 17. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 18. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.