HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 432 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Case called out. Nobody is present to press the application nor any request for adjournment of the case has been made. 2. Heard Sri Jayant Singh Tomar, learned AGA-I for the State. 3. On 12.05.2025, after hearing learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State, this court had passed the following order: "1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA appearing on behalf of State while power on behalf of informant has been filed by Mr. Umesh Singh Lodhi, Advocate, which is taken on record. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed today is also taken on record. 3. This first anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No. 0097 of 2025 under Sections 326(G) & 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station Ashiyana, District Lucknow. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vijay Prakash Tiwari, Gauri Suwan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Umesh Singh Lodhi Faiz Ahmad .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 4. As per contents of first information report, the incident is said to have taken place on 15.03.2025 when one Ikhlaq alongwith applicant and other co-accused are said to have attacked the applicant and his family members by throwing a petrol bomb upon them. 5. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against him which would be evident from the fact that there is no specific role assigned to applicant in harming the informant of his family members. It is submitted that the only role attributed to applicant is that of accompanying the co-accused. Previous criminal history of eight cases has been explained and applicant is co-operating in the investigation, which is still ongoing. 6. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for informant have opposed application with the submission that applicant has in fact been clearly identified not only in the CCTV footage but also by independent eye-witnesses and therefore his role is clearly discernible. Learned AGA on the basis of instructions, however, admits that investigation is still ongoing and that applicant is not co-operating in the investigation. 7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, it appears that although applicant has been nominated in the FIR but there is no specific allegation levelled against him in the FIR. The only aspect discernible at this stage is of being a gang number of the main accused Ikhlaq Ahmad and accompanying him during the incident. 8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court finds it to be a fit case of interim anticipatory bail. 9. Let the accused-applicant Faiz Ahmad as an interim NABAIL No. 432 of 2025 2 measure be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court. 10. In the event of arrest, the accused-applicant shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:- (i) That the accused-applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. (ii) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. 11. List this case on 12.06.2025, as fresh showing the name of Mr. Umesh Singh Lodhi as learned counsel for opposite party. 12. Objections may be filed in the meantime. 13. Applicant is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer concerned on 16.05.2025 at 02:00 PM. 14. Learned AGA shall obtain instructions by next date of listing whether the applicant is co-operating in the investigation or not." 4. The State has filed a counter affidavit stating that the NABAIL No. 432 of 2025 3 applicant has committed arson, he is absconding and is not cooperating with the investigation. Although a copy of the counter affidavit was served on the learned counsel for the applicant on 20.06.2025, no rejoinder affidavit has been filed till date refuting the aforesaid averment. 5. Non appearance of learned counsel for the applicant without any application for adjournment fortifies the aforesaid contention made in the counter affidavit. 6. In these circumstances, the applicant is not entitled to be granted anticipatory bail. 7. The anticipatory bail application is accordingly rejected. September 19, 2025 Pradeep/- NABAIL No. 432 of 2025 4 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench