Allahabad High Court
IBNE ALI @ SHAHRUKHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- JAI PRAKASH TIWARI
Holding
The Court held that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.
Summary
The applicant, Ibne Ali @ Shahrukh, was arrested in connection with Crime No.329 of 2025 under several sections of the B.N.S. and the Arms Act. He contended that he was falsely implicated in a Rs.50 lakh demand case, that the alleged victim's recovery details were undisclosed, and that he had been in custody for over six months. The applicant also pointed to the release on bail of a co‑accused, Nigar, as a ground for parity. The State opposed the bail, but the Court, after considering the nature of the offence, the evidence, and the submissions, decided that bail could be granted without expressing a view on the merits. The Court ordered the applicant’s release on personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions of trial attendance, non‑tampering with witnesses, and refraining from illegal activities, and directed verification of sureties' identities.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail during the pendency of trial despite the seriousness of the offences alleged.
- Whether parity with a co‑accused who was granted bail warrants granting bail to the applicant.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- parity
- criminal procedure
- Arms Act
- B.N.S.
- trial conditions
- personal bond
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6624 of 2026
Ibne Ali @ Shahrukh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajai Kumar, Mahendra Kumar Maurya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.
1. The present case has been taken up out of turn under the category of
mention cases..
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the material on record.
3. By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case
Crime No.329 of 2025, under Sections 140(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5)
of B.N.S. & 3/25(1-B)(a) of Arms Act P.S. Alapur, District-Budaun, is
seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case
due to some ulterior motive. Allegation of demand of Rs.50,00,000/- has
been leveled against the applicant- accused and the victim was stated to
be recovered from Mumbai but neither the place of recovery of the victim
and from whose possession the victim was recovered, have not been
disclosed nor anything relating to present case has been recovered either
from the possession of applicant or on his pointing out. He next submitted
that the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.10.2025 i.e. for last more
than six months. He lastly submitted that almost similarly placed co-
accused Nigar has been released on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this
Court vide order dated 30.04.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No. 3934 of 2026, therefore, applicant may also be enlarged
on bail on the ground of parity.
BAIL No. 6624 of 2026
2
5. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.
6. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the
accused, severity of the punishment, and submissions of learned counsel
for the parties; without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on
bail during the pendency of the trial.
7. Let applicant, Ibne Ali @ Shahrukh be released on bail in the
aforesaid case on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two
sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned
subject to the following conditions:-
i. The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending
before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
ii. He will not tamper with the witnesses.
iii. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
8. It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the
sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be
at liberty to cancel the bail.
(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
May 7, 2026
KK Patel
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHN KANT PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…