Allahabad High Court
MOHAMMAD ZAFAR @ RAJU @ GUDDU KHANversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The applicant, Mohammad Zafar, was arrested in a case under Sections 4 and 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, for alleged involvement in illegal sex trade. He contended that the allegations were false, that the guest house where girls were rescued belonged to co‑accused Anil Kumar Pandey, and that he had no prior criminal record, having been in custody for over two months. The prosecution could not refute the factual submissions made by the applicant’s counsel. The court noted that co‑accused who owned and managed the guest house had already been granted bail, and the applicant also lacked a criminal history. Considering these circumstances, the court held that the applicant was entitled to bail, subject to a personal bond, sureties, and conditions to appear in court and not tamper with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is eligible for bail under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 in view of the allegations and his custodial period.
Legislation cited
- Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 — s. 4, 5
Subjects
- bail
- Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act
- illegal sex trade
- criminal history
- sureties
- court conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9171 of 2026
Mohammad Zafar @ Raju @ Guddu Khan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raghvendra Pratap Rajan, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Heard Sri Durgesh Kumar Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by
Sri R.P. Rajan, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashutosh Singh,
learned AGA for the State.
2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 99 of 2026, under Section 4, 5
Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, Police Station Lanka, District
Varanasi, during pendency of the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that, however, as per
allegation, applicant indulged in illegal sex trade along with other accused
and he was one of the touts but entire allegations made against him are
totally false.
4. He next submits, admittedly the alleged guest house from where girls
were recovered did not belong to the applicant and co-accused Anil
Kumar Pandey was owner of the guest house and co-accused Jitendra
Kumar was Manager of the guest house and both have been released on
bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court.
5. He next submits, Anil Kumar Pandey has been released on bail by the
coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 31.03.2026 passed in
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.10823 of 2026 and co-accused
Jitendra Kumar has been released on bail by the coordinate Bench of this
Court, vide order dated 13.04.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No.10680 of of 2026.
BAIL No. 9171 of 2026
2
6. He next submits, the case of the applicant is even on better footing than
both the above accused.
7. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and he
is in jail in the present matter since 20.02.2026 i.e., for the last more than
two months.
8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not
dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the
applicant.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of
the case.
10. However, as per allegations, applicant one of the touts and he along
with other co-accused persons involved in illegal sex trade but as per
prosecution, alleged girls were recovered from the guest house, which
belonged to co-accused Anil Kumar Pandey and co-accused Jitendra
Kumar was Manager of the guest house and both the above co-accused
have been released on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court.
11. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history to his
credit and in the present matter, he is in jail since 20.02.2026 i.e. for last
more than two months.
12. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case
discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
13. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
case, the instant bail application is allowed.
14. Let the applicant- Mohammad Zafar @ Raju @ Guddu Khan 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
BAIL No. 9171 of 2026
3
or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social
activity.
15. 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.
16. 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.
(Sameer Jain,J.)
April 20, 2026
Mini
Digitally signed by :-
MINI KANAUJIYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…