Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 158641 (ALL)

AMAN AFZAL v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO AND ANOTHER

NABAIL/1089/2025 · 2025-08-26

Subhash Vidyarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1089 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Shri Kaleem Ur Rehman, Learned Counsel for the applicant, Shri Jayant Singh Tomar, learned Addl. Government Advocate-I, for the state, and Sri Mohd. Maif Khan, learned counsel for the opp. party/complainant. 2. The applicant has filed this application anticipatory seeking bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 569 of 2024 under Sections 115(2), 127(2), 308(5), 351(3), 191(2), P.S. Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged on 18/11/2024 against one Ankit and 4-5 other unnamed persons. The FIR states that the informant had asked his friend, Aman Afzal (applicant herein), that he wanted to sell crypto. The applicant told the informant that his friend, Ankit, trades in crypto and would purchase it from the informant. Thereafter, the informant met the named accused, Ankit, who made him transfer crypto without paying consideration therefor. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent. He has falsely been implicated in the present case, and he has no criminal history. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the police had sought remand of the applicant in the present case, but the same was rejected by an order dated 23/11/2024, passed by the Incharge Chief Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kaleem Ur Rehman Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Aman Afzal .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow. The Magistrate had ordered release of the applicant on furnishing a personal bond for ₹20,000. . 6. When the court asked a question from the learned counsel for the applicant about the applicant's apprehension of being arrested now, when the trial court had released him on furnishing a personal bond, the learned counsel stated that he did not want to press the instant application. Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed as not pressed. August 26, 2025 A.Nigam NABAIL No. 1089 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench