Allowed¶14

Nazar Raza Naqvi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Nov 2025BAIL/41165/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court bail grant; Nazar Raza Naqvi v. State of U.P.; CRL. MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 41165 of 2025; decided 21.11.2025 by Dr. Gautam Chowdhary, J.; Case Crime No. 428 of 2025, P.S. Didoli, District Amroha; Sections 74, 351(2), 70(1) BNS; statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS; contradiction between FIR and witness statements; medical examination 22.09.2025 showing no injuries; bail on personal bond with two local sureties; conditions imposed; cancellation on default; no opinion expressed on merits.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted: applicant Nazar Raza Naqvi to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 428 of 2025 (Sections 74, 351(2), 70(1) of B.N.S., P.S. Didoli, District Amroha) on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions (i)-(v) set out in paras 15-19.

Nazar Raza Naqvi vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Nazar Raza Naqvi should be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 428 of 2025 under Sections 74, 351(2), 70(1) of B.N.S., P.S. Didoli, District Amroha, notwithstanding the prosecution's objection, in view of the material contradictions urged between the FIR and the victim's statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS.

¶13

Court's answer

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations and the gravity of the offence, and without expressing any opinion on merits, the Court found the matter to be a fit case for bail and allowed the bail application.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

The applicant is to be enlarged on bail on a personal bond with two local sureties each in the like amount, subject to enumerated conditions (non-tampering with evidence, non-harassment of witnesses, appearance on fixed dates, non-commission of similar offences, and no inducement/threat/promise to dissuade persons from disclosing facts); upon default of any condition, the concerned court may cancel the bail in accordance with law.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary, J.) - Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41165 of 2025, decided November 21, 2025 - ALLOWED. Bail granted to Nazar Raza Naqvi in Case Crime No. 428 of 2025 under Sections 74, 351(2), 70(1) of B.N.S., P.S. Didoli, District Amroha. Background per counsel: applicant named in FIR lodged 19.09.2025 for an alleged incident of 18.09.2025; victim's Section 180 BNSS statement alleged obscene activity without any allegation of rape, while her subsequent Section 183 BNSS statement alleged rape against the applicant and one other person; medical examination of 22.09.2025 revealed no external or internal injury; applicant in jail since 21.09.2025 with no criminal history. Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer. Granting bail without expressing any opinion on merits, the Court ordered enlargement on a personal bond with two local sureties each in the like amount, imposing conditions including non-tampering with evidence and non-harassment of witnesses, with liberty to the concerned court to cancel bail on default of any condition.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41165 of 2025

¶2

Nazar Raza Naqvi

¶3

.....Applicant(s)

¶4

	Versus
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Faheem Ahmad, Zafar Abbas
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 65

¶6

HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is named in the FIR. In the FIR as well as in her statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS the victim alleges that on the alleged date the applicant called her outside the village, when she reached there the applicant committed obscene activity with her, as such she has not made any allegation of rape at this stage, whereas, in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS she has made allegation of rape against the applicant and one other person. The alleged incident took place on 18.09.2025, the FIR was lodged on 19.09.2025, whereas the victim was medically examined on 22.09.2025 and in her medical examination no external or internal injury was found on the person of the victim. Learned counsel further submits that there are material contradiction in the version of FIR as well as in her statements recorded under Section 180 & 183 BNSS. The victim and the applicant were known to each other from earlier. Initially she has not made any allegation of rape against the applicant but at a later stage when her statement under Section 183 BNSS was recorded she has made allegation of rape first time. Thus, it appears that applicant has been implicated in the case with false and frivolous allegation due to ulterior motive. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that the applicant is in jail since 21.09.2025, with no criminal history.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the

¶10

BAIL No. 41165 of 2025

¶11

¶12

applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

¶13

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant-Nazar Raza Naqvi, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 428 of 2025, under Sections 74, 351(2), 70(1) of B.N.S., Police Station- Didoli, District- Amroha, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶15

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶16

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶17

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶18

iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

¶19

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law.

¶21

(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)

¶22

November 21, 2025

¶23

Mustaqeem.

¶24

Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nazar Raza Naqvi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nazar Raza Naqvi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prashant Kumar Sharma vs State of U.P.

Nitesh Pandey vs State of U.P. and Another

Bablu Rajbhar vs State of U.P.

Siraj Ahmad vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Israil vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anil Gangwar Alias Neta vs State of U.P.