Allahabad High Court
NOOR MOHAMMADversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the accused without addressing the merits of the case.
Summary
The accused Noor Mohammad applied for bail in a fraud case (Criminal No. 845 of 2024) alleging that he received Rs.12 lakh from the informant for a contract to erect an Airtel tower, of which part was repaid and a cheque later dishonoured. He has 14 criminal cases pending, is on bail in nine, and is in custody for this case since 26‑08‑2024. The informant and the State opposed bail but did not dispute the factual background. The Court, after considering the submissions, noted that the money was transacted for a business purpose and, without addressing the merits, allowed the bail application. The Court ordered release on personal bond with two sureties, citing Supreme Court dicta on bail policy, and directed the accused to cooperate for speedy disposal.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving alleged fraud, cheating and criminal conspiracy under multiple IPC sections.
- Whether the nature of the transaction (business contract) negates the allegation of cheating for bail considerations.
- Whether the pending Section 138 Negotiable Instruments case affects the grant of bail.
- Whether the accused's history of multiple pending cases and prior bail status influences the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 131, 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 352, 61(2)
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- fraud
- cheating
- IPC sections
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- business contract
- Airtel tower
- court discretion
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26290 of 2025
Noor Mohammad
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Deepak Kumar Tripathi, Hari Narayan
Singh, Pramod Kumar Sahani
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ram Bilas Yadav
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Deepak Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the accused-
applicant, Sri Ram Vilas Yadav, learned counsel for the informant and
learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the accused-applicant
Noor Mohammad to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 845 of 2024,
under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 316(2), 131, 352,
61(2) BNS, P.S.- Chiluatal, District- Gorakhpur, during the pendency of
trial.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the accused-applicant that the
accused-applicant has been implicated in F.I.R. dated 10.11.2024 lodged
by Chandra Shekhar, the informant with the allegation against six persons
including the accused-applicant that the accused persons had taken Rs.12
lakhs and duped him on the pretext that they will provide a contract for
erecting tower of Airtel. Further contended that Rs.7 lakhs has been paid
to the applicant through UPI and Rs. 5 lakhs as cash. Further contended
that it was merely a business transaction, for which, the money was
accepted. The applicant has returned Rs.6,54,000/- in the account of the
informant and for the remaining Rs.5 lakhs, there was a cheque issued by
the applicant in favour of the informant's wife, which was dishonoured
and the case under Section 138 N.I. Act is pending. The applicant has not
cheated the informant, but the allegation is of handing over of bribe for
getting erected the Airtel tower. The applicant has 14 cases criminal
BAIL No. 26290 of 2025
2
history, in 9 cases, he is on bail, one case has ended in compromise and in
four cases, he is in jail. The charge sheet is submitted. The trial is still at
the nascent stage. The applicant is in jail since 26.08.2024 and hence, the
applicant seeks to be released on bail.
4. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for State have
opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant, but could not dispute the
aforesaid facts.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considered that the money has been transacted for getting erected the
Airtel tower.
7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is
allowed.
8. The accused/applicant 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 court concerned in view of observation made by the
Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in
re [(2024)10SCC 685].
9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and
speedy disposal.
(Avnish Saxena,J.)
September 29, 2026
Shivangi
Digitally signed by :-
SHIVANGI YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…