Disposed

Ayaz Ahmad and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home and Another

Allahabad HC17 Oct 2025NABAIL/1552/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application in a BNS case arising as the fourth FIR lodged by the same complainant out of animosity from an earlier FIR. The court granted interim anticipatory bail to the applicants, subject to cooperation with the investigation and trial.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted in the event of arrest on personal bond and two sureties, subject to cooperation conditions.

Ayaz Ahmad and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1552 of 2025

¶2

Ayaz Ahmad And Another

¶3

.....Applicant(s)

¶4

Versus

¶5

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home And Another

¶6

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Faizal Hashmi, Raj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 15

¶8

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶9

The applicants have moved the present application under praying for grant of anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.-112/2025, Under sections191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 331(6) Β.Ν.S., P.S.-Kaiserganj DistrictBahraich.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that earlier, FIR No. 109/2024 under Section 363 IPC read with Sections 16 and 17 of the POCSO Act was registered against the applicants and co-accused Azad, who is the real brother of the applicanst, alleging that they had enticed away the daughter of opposite party no. 2. To exert pressure upon the applicants, the same complainant subsequently lodged another FIR, being FIR No. 182/2024, under Sections 323, 504, and 506 IPC. Thereafter, due to the same grudge, yet another FIR, being FIR No. 277/2024, under Sections 333, 115(2), and 351(2) of the BNS, was also registered at the instance of the same informant against the applicants. The present case is thus the fourth successive FIR lodged by the same complainant solely out of animosity arising from the first FIR No. 109/2024.

¶12

It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the present prosecution is malicious, and except for these cases, the applicants have no other criminal history. The applicants undertake to cooperate in the

¶13

NABAIL No. 1552 of 2025

¶14

¶15

investigation.

¶16

Learned AGA has opposed the bail application, submitting that the investigation is still in progress. It is stated that one injured person, Altaf Ahamd, has sustained three injuries; however, it is not disputed that the said injuries are simple in nature.

¶17

Issue notice to respondent No. 2.

¶18

Steps be taken within a week.

¶19

List on 08.12.2025. Counter affidavit to be filed by the learned AGA in the meantime.

¶20

On due consideration to the fact that this is the fourth successive FIR lodged by the same informant against the applicants, the applicants have no criminal history, and keeping in view the undertaking given on his behalf to cooperate with the trial, I am of the considered opinion that the applicants deserve to be granted interim anticipatory bail in light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, subject to his continued cooperation in the trial.

¶21

Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicants Ayaz Ahmad and Fayaz Ahmad, shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned.

¶22

The applicants shall report to the investigating officer within twenty days from today. He shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicants will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicants shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.

¶23

In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection.

¶24

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶25

October 17, 2025/R.C.

¶26

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ayaz Ahmad and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ayaz Ahmad and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarvesh @ Sarvesh Mishra @ Banne Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Manoj Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Sarvesh @ Sarvesh Mishra @ Banne Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Avadhesh Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Kalyan Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Ajeet Singh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another