Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24858 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12780 of 2024 Applicant :- Faiyaz Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chicf Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. The State has filed a counter-affidavit on 01.02.2025 after supplying its copy to the learned counsel for the applicant, but no rejoinder affidavit has been filed by him till today, therefore, the application is being decided on the basis of material available on record. 2. Heard Sri Alok Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Diwakar Singh, the learned A.G.A. 3. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 163/2024, under Sections 354D, 504, 506, 376, I.P.C. and Section 66-D, 67, I.T. Act, Police Station Fatehpur Chaurasi, District Unnao. 4. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 01.06.2024 stating that the informant had given Rs. 25000.00 and a piece of jewellery to the applicant and when she demanded its return, the applicant opposed and threatened her. 5. In her statement recorded under Section 180, B.N.S.S. the informant supported the F.I.R. version. 6. In the additional statement of the informant she stated that after she had lodged the F.I.R. and the Police had visited the applicant’s home for arresting him, the applicant started harassing her through social media by sending obscene messages and posting obscene comments. It has further been stated that the applicant has prepared fake I.D. in the name of the informant’s younger sister and he is posting obscene messages to her through that. 7. 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. 8. Relevant material collected during investigation has been annexed with the counter-affidavit filed by the State and it is recorded therein that after communication was made with Meta, it came to light that the Facebook I.D. in the name of the informant’s younger sister has been prepared using mobile phone number of the applicant. This averment in the counter- affidavit has not been controverted on behalf of the applicant by filing a rejoinder affidavit. 9. As the applicant has not disputed the fact that a fake Fasebook of the informant’s younger sister was prepared using his mobile phone and obscene messages were posted through his mobile phone, I am of the view that facts of the present case do not warrant exercise of discretion of this court by enlarging the applicant on bail. The bail-application is accordingly rejected. 10. After the aforesaid ordeer has been completed, the learned counsel for the applicant did not leave the place for the next counsel and he kept on advancing submissions. He stated that the dispute is only regarding monetary transactions between the parties and the F.I.R. has been lodged when the applicant did not refund the money taken by him, however, even during this second round of submissions he could not advance any submission to refute the contention contained in the counter- affidavit that a fake Facebook profile of the informant’s younger sister has been prepared through the applicant's mobile phone and obscene material/messages have been posting using the applicant's mobile phone. Besides finding no force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant after the order having been passed, the Court also does not appreciate the practice of the learned counsel for the applicant in advancing arguments after the bail-application had already been decided and the order had been passed. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 30.4.2025 A.Nigam Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench