Allahabad High Court
HABIBULLAHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Habibullah, who was alleged to be involved in a crime under Sections 103(1), 238(b), 61(2)(a), 309(6) and 317(2) of the B.N.S. The applicant claimed false implication, lack of incriminating material, and pointed out that co‑accused of similar standing had already been granted bail. The prosecution relied on the applicant’s name in the FIR, recovery of an iron pipe allegedly pointed out by him, and a confessional statement of a co‑accused, though the court noted the statement’s inadmissibility. After weighing the facts, the nature of the offence, the applicant’s clean record, jail overcrowding, and recent Supreme Court and High Court precedents on bail, the judge held that the applicant was entitled to bail. Consequently, the bail application was allowed subject to standard bond and surety conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant, Habibullah, is entitled to bail despite being named in the FIR and a confessional statement of a co‑accused.
- Whether the recovery of an alleged weapon and the confessional statement constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 103(1), 238(b), 309(6), 317(2), 61(2)(a)
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- confessional statement inadmissibility
- overcrowded jails
- criminal procedure
- sections 103, 238, 61, 309, 317
- Supreme Court bail guidelines
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40968 of 2025
Habibullah
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ravindra Prakash Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Kiran Rani, Laloo Yadav
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Shri Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the
applicant, Ms. Kiran Rani, learned counsel for the first informant and Shri
S.D. Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 60 of 2025, under Sections 103(1),
238(b), 61(2)(a), 309(6), 317(2) of B.N.S., Police Station Mohana, District
Siddharth Nagar, during the pendency of the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case though there is no incriminating
material against him. It is further submitted that similarly placed co-accused
Shahzad, Irshad, Dinesh Kumar alias Manjesh, Rahul and Jubaida have
already been granted bail by the different Co-ordinate Benches of this Court.
It is further submitted that the applicant is named in the first information
report and his name has been mentioned in the first information report only
on the basis of suspicion and during investigation, co-accused Irshad has
been arrested on the basis of some confidential information and the name of
the applicant and other co-accused have surfaced in the confessional
statement of the co-accused and the confessional statement of the co-accused
is not admissible and apart from that weapon of offence an iron pipe is said
to have been recovered at the pointing out of the applicant from an open
place. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history
and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 08.04.2025, in case, he is
granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the
BAIL No. 40968 of 2025
2
trial proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A.
have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted by
them that the applicant is named in the first information report and during
investigation, weapon of offence an iron pipe has been recovered at his
pointing out and the name of the applicant has surfaced in the confessional
statement of co-accused Irshad
5. The applicant is named in the first information report on the basis of
suspicion and as per first information report, the brother of the first
informant went missing on 05.04.2025, thereafter his half burnt body was
recovered. It is further submitted that during investigation, co-accused Irshad
has been arrested on the basis of some confidential information and the name
of the applicant and other co-accused have surfaced in the confessional
statement of the co-accused and the confessional statement of the co-accused
is not admissible and apart from that weapon of offence an iron pipe is said
to have been recovered at the pointing out of the applicant from an open
place. Similarly placed co-accused Shahzad, Irshad, Dinesh Kumar alias
Manjesh, Rahul and Jubaida have already been granted bail by the different
Co-ordinate Benches of this Court. It is further submitted that the applicant
is having no criminal history and the applicant has been languishing in jail
since 08.04.2025.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of
learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence,
evidence, complicity of the accused and taking into account overcrowded
jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial courts as well as
considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of
Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2025 SCC
OnLine SC 3038 as well as guideline of this Court in the case of Maya
Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding
grant of bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I
am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
7. Accordingly, the present application is ALLOWED.
8. Let the applicant- Habibullah involved in the aforementioned crime be
released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in
the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following
BAIL No. 40968 of 2025
3
conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer
or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without
seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission
of any crime after being released on bail.
(iv) The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond
executed by him.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
10. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Verification
of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as well as sureties
should be verified by the court concerned.
11. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the
concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure
early release of the applicant.
12. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
Jail Superintendent, Siddharth Nagar, via e-mail or e-prison portal within
24 hours in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy
Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of
2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685.
September 24, 2026
RKM
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…