Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 148854 (ALL)

NASEEB ULLA @ NASEEM ULLA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO AND ANOTHER

NABAIL/763/2025 · 2025-07-01

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37075 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 763 of 2025 Applicant :- Naseeb Ulla @ Naseem Ulla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arti Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. The present bail application under Section 482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime/FIR No. 81/2025, under Section 109 of BNS and Section 3/25/27 of Arms Act, P.S. Bandhuakala, District Sultanpur. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Tanvi Jain, learned A.G.A. for the State. A supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present matter. The applicant’s criminal history, involving five cases, has been duly explained in the supplementary affidavit. It is further contended that the applicant’s name has surfaced on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused Mosim, who sustained a gunshot injury in the firing of police party. No recovery has been made from the applicant. On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the anticipatory bail application, arguing that the applicant has a criminal history of five cases. A recovery has been made from co- accused Mosim. The applicant ran away from the spot. It is submitted that custodial interrogation of the applicant is required and the investigation in the FIR is still pending. Hence, it cannot be said to be a case of false implication. Upon a perusal of the record and considering the fact that the applicant has a criminal antecedent of five cases, including three under the Cow Slaughter Act, as well as the fact that his name surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused Mosim, who suffered a gunshot injury and from whom recovery was made, it does not appear to be a case of false implication. No ground for granting anticipatory bail is made out. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application stands rejected. Order Date :- 1.7.2025 R.C. Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench