Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22921 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3423 of 2025 Applicant :- Mukeem Ahmad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Srivastava,Avinash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State and perused the record. 2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.17 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 351(2), 352 BNS & 3/25, 5/27 Arms Act, P.S.Leelapur, District Pratapgarh. 3. As per contents of F.I.R.,the incident is said to have taken place on 21.01.2025 when a police team upon receiving tip off from the police informant with regard to presence of applicant at a particular place, intercepted him for the purposes of his arrest since he was declared as absconder with the award of Rs.50,000/- on his head. It is stated that upon being surrounded by a police team, the applicant along with co-accused is said to have opened fire on the police team but was subsequently over powered and taken into custody. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the charges levelled against him only on account of his previous criminal history. It is also submitted that although Section 109 (1) of BNS has been imposed against the applicant, there is no injury suffered by any of the police team despite allegation that the applicant fired on the police team. 5. It is submitted that previous criminal history of applicant has already been explained in affidavit filed in support of the application. It is also stated that entire story has been fabricated only to show his implication for applicant's arrest. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed bail application with submission that contents of the FIR clearly indicate the aspect that the applicant is absconder and has been arrested by police team only after due diligence and great efforts. It is submitted that even if the injury has not been suffered but attempt to murder was made, Section 109 (1) of BNS would be applicable. It is however admitted that applicant's previous criminal history has been explained. 7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties, perusal of material available on record and prima facie subject to further evidence being led during trial, it appears that the applicant has been taken into custody on the basis of information supplied by the police informant. Although allegation of opening fire on the police team has been levelled against the applicant, it is admitted that it is a no injury case. The aspect of applicability of Section 109 (1) of BNS would therefore be subject matter of evidence during the course of trial. The previous criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the affidavit filed in support of the application. 8. Looking to the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant and submission made in the bail application, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, particularly since no reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses has been alleged, prima facie, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 9. Accordingly bail application is allowed. 10. Let applicant, Mukeem Ahmad involved in the aforesaid case 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 conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. Order Date :- 23.4.2025 Renu/- Digitally signed by :- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench