M.A. Khan v. State Of U.P. Through Secretary, Home Department, Lucknow And Another

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.07.2025 while granting interim protection to the applicant has passed the following order:- "1. This petition/ application has been filed through e-mode and learned counsel for the applicant has supplied the photocopy of the hard copy, the same is taken on record.

2. Heard Shri Shashank Shekhar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Arun Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. Issue notice to opposite party no.2.

4. Steps within a week.

5. Office to proceed accordingly.

6. By means of this anticipatory bail application, the present applicant is apprehending his arrest in Case Crime/ FIR No.128 of 2025, under Sections 2 ABAIL No. 801 of 2025 308(5), 111 of BNS, Police Station Wazirganj, District Lucknow.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the First Information Report (in short FIR).

8. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR, wherein the allegation has been levelled against two accused persons, one is Nikant Jain and another is present applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court towards the prosecution story so narrated in the FIR and in the entire FIR only one allegation has been levelled against the present applicant that he is threatening the complainant to leave the land otherwise he will have face dire consequences. Mainly allegations have levelled against accused - Nikant Jain. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure No.4, which is an anticipatory bail order granted by the learned District Court vide order dated 13.06.2025 in favour of the present applicant in Case Crime No.204 of 2019, under Sections 406, 520, 506 IPC, Police Station Wazirganj, District Lucknow. The present FIR is an extension of earlier FIR and so as to implicate the present applicant, falsely misconceived allegations have been levelled against him.

9. Further attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.6, whereby the bail orders of the co-accused persons, namely, Ali Raza Naki and Nikant Jain have been granted bail by the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge P.C. Act-1, Lucknow, which have been enclosed with this anticipatory bail application. Except the one criminal history, wherein the present applicant has been granted anticipatory bail, he is having no other criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The present applicant has stated that in the present case, investigation is going on and the applicant undertakes that he shall cooperate in the investigation and shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, if granted by this Court, therefore, the aspect of liberty may be protected in the light of the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

10. Matter requires consideration.

11. Let counter affidavit be filed within a period of four weeks.

12. List this matter in the week commencing 01.09.2025 within top ten cases.

13. Till the next date of listing, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant Abdul Moid Khan @ M.A. Khan shall be released on interim anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/ court concerned with the following 3 ABAIL No. 801 of 2025 conditions:- I. that the present applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 31.07.2025 at 11:00 AM sharp to cooperate in the investigation and shall further cooperate in the investigation till completion of the investigation and filing of the police report, failing which, this interim order may be vacated on the next date. II. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; III. 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; IV. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; V. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant; VI. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. "

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that allegation in the F.I.R. are baseless and applicant has been falsely implicated. The investigating officer has filed the charge sheet without collecting the cogent and tangible evidence. He submits that in compliance of the order dated 28.07.2025, applicant has filed the bail bonds and has been released on interim anticipatory bail by the learned trial court. Applicant undertakes to cooperate in the trial. Applicant has not misused the liberty of interim protection granted by this Court.

5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that charge-sheet has been filed however, upon a query made by the court, he could not show that prior to lodging of this F.I.R. more than one charge- sheet as required under Section 111 BNS had been filed against the applicant.

6. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also the fact that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation and he shall cooperate in the trial, the interim protection granted by this Court vide 4 ABAIL No. 801 of 2025 order dated 28.07.2025 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

7. It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

8. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. September 1, 2025 Saurabh Yadav/- (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.07.2025 while granting interim protection to the applicant has passed the following order:- "1. This petition/ application has been filed through e-mode and learned counsel for the applicant has supplied the photocopy of the hard copy, the same is taken on record.

2. Heard Shri Shashank Shekhar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Arun Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. Issue notice to opposite party no.2.

4. Steps within a week.

5. Office to proceed accordingly.

6. By means of this anticipatory bail application, the present applicant is apprehending his arrest in Case Crime/ FIR No.128 of 2025, under Sections 2 ABAIL No. 801 of 2025 308(5), 111 of BNS, Police Station Wazirganj, District Lucknow.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the First Information Report (in short FIR).

8. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR, wherein the allegation has been levelled against two accused persons, one is Nikant Jain and another is present applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court towards the prosecution story so narrated in the FIR and in the entire FIR only one allegation has been levelled against the present applicant that he is threatening the complainant to leave the land otherwise he will have face dire consequences. Mainly allegations have levelled against accused - Nikant Jain. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure No.4, which is an anticipatory bail order granted by the learned District Court vide order dated 13.06.2025 in favour of the present applicant in Case Crime No.204 of 2019, under Sections 406, 520, 506 IPC, Police Station Wazirganj, District Lucknow. The present FIR is an extension of earlier FIR and so as to implicate the present applicant, falsely misconceived allegations have been levelled against him.

9. Further attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.6, whereby the bail orders of the co-accused persons, namely, Ali Raza Naki and Nikant Jain have been granted bail by the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge P.C. Act-1, Lucknow, which have been enclosed with this anticipatory bail application. Except the one criminal history, wherein the present applicant has been granted anticipatory bail, he is having no other criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The present applicant has stated that in the present case, investigation is going on and the applicant undertakes that he shall cooperate in the investigation and shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, if granted by this Court, therefore, the aspect of liberty may be protected in the light of the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

10. Matter requires consideration.

11. Let counter affidavit be filed within a period of four weeks.

12. List this matter in the week commencing 01.09.2025 within top ten cases.

13. Till the next date of listing, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant Abdul Moid Khan @ M.A. Khan shall be released on interim anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/ court concerned with the following 3 ABAIL No. 801 of 2025 conditions:- I. that the present applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 31.07.2025 at 11:00 AM sharp to cooperate in the investigation and shall further cooperate in the investigation till completion of the investigation and filing of the police report, failing which, this interim order may be vacated on the next date. II. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; III. 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; IV. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; V. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant; VI. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. "

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that allegation in the F.I.R. are baseless and applicant has been falsely implicated. The investigating officer has filed the charge sheet without collecting the cogent and tangible evidence. He submits that in compliance of the order dated 28.07.2025, applicant has filed the bail bonds and has been released on interim anticipatory bail by the learned trial court. Applicant undertakes to cooperate in the trial. Applicant has not misused the liberty of interim protection granted by this Court.

5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that charge-sheet has been filed however, upon a query made by the court, he could not show that prior to lodging of this F.I.R. more than one charge- sheet as required under Section 111 BNS had been filed against the applicant.

6. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also the fact that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation and he shall cooperate in the trial, the interim protection granted by this Court vide 4 ABAIL No. 801 of 2025 order dated 28.07.2025 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

7. It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

8. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. September 1, 2025 Saurabh Yadav/- (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench