Naushad vs State Of U.P. on 12 May, 2026

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Naushad vs State Of U.P. on 12 May, 2026

Bench: Vivek Varma





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC:110135
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37257 of 2025   
 
   Naushad    
 
  .....Applicant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State of U.P.    
 
  .....Opposite Party(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Applicant(s)   
 
:   
 
Ram Chandra Solanki, Varsha Soni   
 
  
 
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A.   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 64
 
   
 
 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri N.K. Sharma, learned AGA for the State. Perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 111 of 2012, under Sections 396, 201 I.P.C., Police Station- Chakarnagar, District Etawah, during the pendency of the trial.

3. Counsel for the applicant submits that earlier the applicant was granted bail by this Court vide order dated 29.4.2013 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11532 of 2013 (Naushad Ahmad vs. State of U.P.). Due to some unavoidable circumstances, the applicant could not appear before the trial court. The applicant surrendered before the trial court on 18.9.2025 and since then he is in jail. In case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

4. Learned AGA for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the report dated 5.12.2025 sent by Special Judge (D.A.A. Act), Etawah, it transpires that, after being released on bail, the applicant absconded from the trial. Thereafter, upon issuance of non-bailable warrants and process under Sections 82 and 83Cr.P.C., the applicant surrendered before the trial court on 18.9.2025. Owing to continued absence of the applicant, the trial proceedings remained held up.

6. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court does not consider it appropriate to grant bail to the applicant.

7. The bail application is, accordingly rejected.

8. However, it is observed that the trial court would endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously.

(Vivek Varma,J.) May 12, 2026 S.S.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Allahabad High Court