High Court · 2025

1. Heard Sri Alok Kr. Misra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nikhil Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. Sri Alok Kr. Misra, learned counsel has filed supplementary affidavit, same is taken on record. In the aforesaid supplementary affidavit, learned counsel for the applicant has explained one criminal history of the present applicant, wherein, the name of the present applicant has been deleted.

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is languishing in jail since 06.05.2025 in Case Crime No.0106 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of B.N.S. Police Station- Uchauliya, District- Lakhimpur Kheri. He has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

4.Attention has been drawn towards impugned FIR wherein the specific allegation of firing has been attributed to main accused Intezar and four unknown persons have also been implicated whose antecedents and details are not known to the informant. In the FIR, the motive and intention has been attributed to main accused Intezar and he had fired upon the deceased Zeeshan resultant thereof he died. Only this much has been indicated in the FIR that his four companions were also present on the spot. While recording his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. (Annexure-3), the same story has been narrated by the informant. Learned counsel for the applicant has referred the Annexure-6 which is a recovery memo wherein the fact has been indicated that alongwith main accused Intezar six other persons namely Ashish Gupta, Sarvjeet, Dampi Singh, Aditya Verma, Ansh Agnihotri and Navneet @ Golu were involved. Learned counsel has further stated that in the FIR the allegation was levelled against four unknown persons, however, in recovery memo the complicity of six persons besides main accused Intezar has been found. Sri Misra has stated that no role has been assigned to any other co-accused persons but only this much has been indicated that they were present with the main accused Intezar, who had fired upon the victim (since deceased).

5. Attention has been drawn towards the order dated 24.06.2025 passed by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 5625 of 2025 whereby co-accused Aditya Verma @ Aadi and Dumpi Singh have been granted bail. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that since the role of the present applicant, as per the prosecution story is identically similar with the co-accused Aditya Verma @ Aadi and Dumpi Singh, therefore, on the basis of principle of pairity, the present applicant may also be enlarged on bail. Sri Misra has stated that investigation is pending and if the applicant is released on bail, he shall cooperate in the investigation and shall not misuse the liberty of the bail.

6. Sri Nikhil Sigh, learned Additional Government Advocate has vehemently opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that all the accused persons are equally responsible for the offence in question and the specific role would be ascertained during the course of the trial.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that the specific allegation of firing has been attributed to main accused Intezar and four unknown persons, Annexure-6 which is a recovery memo wherein the fact has been indicated that alongwith main accused Intezar, six other persons, namely, Ashish Gupta, Sarvjeet, Dampi Singh, Aditya Verma, Ansh Agnihotri and Navneet @ Golu were involved, co-accused Aditya Verma @ Aadi and Dumpi Singh have been granted bail by this Court on 24.06.2025 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 5625 of 2025; and the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and he shall cooperate in the investigation properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant (Ansh Agnihotri) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer to cooperate in the investigation and shall further remain present to cooperate in the investigation as and when the Investigating Team calls him to appear and if the charge-sheet is filed against him he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly and shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. The present applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. Order Date :- 3.7.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Sri Alok Kr. Misra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nikhil Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. Sri Alok Kr. Misra, learned counsel has filed supplementary affidavit, same is taken on record. In the aforesaid supplementary affidavit, learned counsel for the applicant has explained one criminal history of the present applicant, wherein, the name of the present applicant has been deleted.

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is languishing in jail since 06.05.2025 in Case Crime No.0106 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of B.N.S. Police Station- Uchauliya, District- Lakhimpur Kheri. He has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

4.Attention has been drawn towards impugned FIR wherein the specific allegation of firing has been attributed to main accused Intezar and four unknown persons have also been implicated whose antecedents and details are not known to the informant. In the FIR, the motive and intention has been attributed to main accused Intezar and he had fired upon the deceased Zeeshan resultant thereof he died. Only this much has been indicated in the FIR that his four companions were also present on the spot. While recording his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. (Annexure-3), the same story has been narrated by the informant. Learned counsel for the applicant has referred the Annexure-6 which is a recovery memo wherein the fact has been indicated that alongwith main accused Intezar six other persons namely Ashish Gupta, Sarvjeet, Dampi Singh, Aditya Verma, Ansh Agnihotri and Navneet @ Golu were involved. Learned counsel has further stated that in the FIR the allegation was levelled against four unknown persons, however, in recovery memo the complicity of six persons besides main accused Intezar has been found. Sri Misra has stated that no role has been assigned to any other co-accused persons but only this much has been indicated that they were present with the main accused Intezar, who had fired upon the victim (since deceased).

5. Attention has been drawn towards the order dated 24.06.2025 passed by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 5625 of 2025 whereby co-accused Aditya Verma @ Aadi and Dumpi Singh have been granted bail. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that since the role of the present applicant, as per the prosecution story is identically similar with the co-accused Aditya Verma @ Aadi and Dumpi Singh, therefore, on the basis of principle of pairity, the present applicant may also be enlarged on bail. Sri Misra has stated that investigation is pending and if the applicant is released on bail, he shall cooperate in the investigation and shall not misuse the liberty of the bail.

6. Sri Nikhil Sigh, learned Additional Government Advocate has vehemently opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that all the accused persons are equally responsible for the offence in question and the specific role would be ascertained during the course of the trial.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that the specific allegation of firing has been attributed to main accused Intezar and four unknown persons, Annexure-6 which is a recovery memo wherein the fact has been indicated that alongwith main accused Intezar, six other persons, namely, Ashish Gupta, Sarvjeet, Dampi Singh, Aditya Verma, Ansh Agnihotri and Navneet @ Golu were involved, co-accused Aditya Verma @ Aadi and Dumpi Singh have been granted bail by this Court on 24.06.2025 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 5625 of 2025; and the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and he shall cooperate in the investigation properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant (Ansh Agnihotri) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer to cooperate in the investigation and shall further remain present to cooperate in the investigation as and when the Investigating Team calls him to appear and if the charge-sheet is filed against him he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly and shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. The present applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. Order Date :- 3.7.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench