Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 166365 (ALL)

FAIZ RAMZI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME SECTT. LKO.

NABAIL/1347/2025 · 2025-09-25

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. - 1347 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Mohd. Hatim, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, Sri Satyendra Srivastava, the learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and Shri Umesh Kumar Maurya and Shri Lallaji Maurya, the learned counsel for the complainant. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No.184 of 2025 under Sections 3(5), 109, 351(2), 352, 126(2) of B.N.S. registered at Police Station- Chowk Commissionerate, District- Lucknow. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 12.07.2025 against four persons, including the applicant, stating that the applicant and two other named accused persons intercepted the complainant and his companions at a path-trisection and started firing gunshots and they threatened and chased the complainant. When a crowd gathered there, co- accused Halim (Prasad) exhorted the other accused persons to fire gunshots. The complainant dialed 112 while running away. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely been implicated in the present case. 5. The applicant's involvement in 2 other cases has been disclosed in para 11 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application in one of which the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Atmad Hasan Idrisi, Mohd Hatim, Shubham Chaurasiya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Faiz Ramzi .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Investigating Officer has submitted a final report and in the other case, the applicant's name has been expunged. 6. A supplementary affidavit has been filed disclosing applicant's involvement in 4 more cases in three of which he has been released on bail. 7. Co-accused Muhammad Halim @ Haleem Prasad has been granted anticipatory bail in the present case by means of an order dated 01.09.2025 passed by this Court in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.1117 of 2025. 8. The learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and he has submitted that Muhammad Halim, who has been granted anticipatory bail, had merely exhorted the other accused persons whereas the allegation against the applicant is of firing gunshots. 9. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that no person has received any injury in the incident; and that a co-accused has already been granted anticipatory bail in the present case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. 10. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant- Faiz Ramzi before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of S.H.O./Court concerned on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court : (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of NABAIL No. 1347 of 2025 2 the court. (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. September 25, 2025 -Amit K- NABAIL No. 1347 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench