HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5306 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the records. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 102 of 2025, under Sections 111(2)B, 55, 336(2) B.N.S. and Section 3/25 Arms Act, registered at Police Station Krishna Nagar, District Lucknow. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged by a Sub Inspector of Police on 01.03.2025 at 3.38 Hrs. against four persons, including the applicant stating that while the informant Sub Inspector and other police persons were engaged in checking of suspicious vehicles and persons and prevention of crime in the area an informer told that on 28.02.2025 that persons sitting in a i20 four wheeler vehicle bearing registration no.UP-78-EQ9565 were making plans to abduct some business man and they were coming from Lok Bandhu Chauraha, Ashiyana towards Sky Hilton and they have automatic lethal weapons. 4. Upon this information the car was intercepted and three persons sitting in it including the applicant, Niyaz and Raju were arrested. Country made pistols and some cartridges were recovered from all the accused persons. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sheikh Mohammad Ali Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mohd. Niyaz .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) The F.I.R. alleges that all the accused persons confessed that they are involved in various criminal cases and they were planning to abduct a businessman of Lucknow named Manish Agarwal at the behest of a businessman Manish Agarwal of District Bahraich. 5. In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present because of his criminal history which has been disclosed in para 21 of the bail application as well as in para no. 2 of the supplementary affidavit, as per which the applicant is involved in 5 other case, in 4 of which he has been granted bail and in one case his arrest has been stayed by this court. It is next submitted that the co-accused Imran Ahmad has already been granted bail by a coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 11.4.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3069 of 2025. Hence, the present applicant claims parity. 6. The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the prayer for bail and he has submitted that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature and the investigation is still going on. 7. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the police claimed to have got an information that the persons sitting in a moving car were planning to abduct some businessman and this information was received while the vehicle was already moving from Lok Bandhu Chauraha, Ashiyana towards Sky Hilton and it is not understandable as to what were the means available with the informer or the police persons from which they came to know about the contents of the conversation held between the persons sitting inside the moving car, whereas the distance between the Lok Bandhu Chauraha, Ashiyana and Sky Hilton is about one kilometer only and it takes about two minutes to cover this distance by car, prima facie it appears that the police officer has cooked up a story which is not believable; the co-accused Imran Ahmad has already been granted bail and the applicant is languishing in jail since 01.03.2025 and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for BAIL No. 5306 of 2025 2 enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime on the ground of parity. 8. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant- Mohd. Niyaz 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 magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) 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. (v) 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 in accordance with law. (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. 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 209 of B.N.S. September 4, 2025 Shravan BAIL No. 5306 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench