HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10141 of 2026 Court No. - 49 HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J. HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J. 1. Heard Mr. Surya Nath Tripathi, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Ambikesh Kumar Sharma, the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned A.G.A. representing State-respondents 1, 2 and 3. 2. Perused the record. 3. Petitioner- Arnav has approached this Court by means of present criminal misc. writ petition challenging the impugned FIR dated 03.04.2026 lodged by first informant-respondent-4 Deepak Pawaar, Sub-Inspector, Police Station- Civil Lines, District- Moradabad and registered as Case Crime No. 0199 of 2026, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109(1), 3(5) of BNS and Section 7 of Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1932, Police Station- Civil Lines, District- Moradabad. 4. On the matter being taken up, learned A.G.A. representing State- respondents 1, 2 and 3 submits that in the incident giving rise to present criminal proceedings, one person namely, the named accused- Lucky Saini has sustained firearm injury. Furthermore, during pendency of the investigation, three of the named accused namely, Akhil Chauhan, Saurabh Kumar and Harsh Chaudhary were arrested. On the pointing out of the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ambikesh Kumar Sharma, Vimal Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Arnav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) arrested accused, recoveries of country-made firearms have also been made. Learned AGA further submits that it has come in the Case Diary that the incident giving rise to present criminal proceeding has also stands recorded in the CCTV installed near the place of occurrence. The complicity of present petitioner has also surfaced in the crime in question. On the above premise, the learned AGA would thus, submit that prima facie, the occurrence is proved. Apart from above, since there is an injured, therefore, no interference is warranted by this Court in present writ petition. 5. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for petitioner fairly gave up the prayer prayed for by means of present writ petition. He, however, submits that in the facts and circumstances of the case, interest of justice shall better be served, in case, a direction is issued by this Court to Court below to decide the bail application of petitioner in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2021) 10 SCC 773. 6. Learned A.G.A. representing State-respondents 1, 2 and 3 does not oppose the aforesaid prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner. 7. In view of above, the prayer prayed for by means of present writ petition is, hereby, refused. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned A.G.A. representing State-respondents 1, 2 & 3, upon perusal of record and considering the bona fide submissions urged by the counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition shall stand disposed of finally with a direction that in case, petitioner appears before court below and applies for bail, then his bail application shall be decided by court concerned in the light of the CRLP No. 10141 of 2026 2 law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (Supra). 9. Interim order, if any, stands discharged. May 5, 2026 Rama Kant CRLP No. 10141 of 2026 3 (Padam Narain Mishra,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAMA KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad