Imran @ Romiyo v. State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32435 of 2026

Imran @ Romiyo

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pramod Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 69

HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.

1. Heard Sri Pramod Kumar, learned counsel for accused applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.

1. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused- Imran @ Romiyo to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 565 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 118(1), 351(3), 352, 117(2) BNS, P.S.- Tronica City, District- Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial.

1. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that the accused applicant has been falsely implicated in FIR dated 29.12.2025 lodged by the father of one of the injured with the allegation against the accused applicant that he has assaulted his son Nazim with a knife and his friend Muzahid. The allegation in the FIR is that there was a birthday party in the house of injured wherein there was some song played, which was objected by the accused applicant which led to an altercation between them. It is in sudden provocation that the accused applicant has inflicted knife blow on Nazim. There is no other weapon shown being used by the accused applicant whereas the two injured Nazim and Muzahid suffered from two different weapons. The injury report of Nazim shows that he suffered stab wound in his abdomen whereas the injury of Muzahid shows that he has been hit by hard and blunt object. The applicant has no criminal history. There is consistent statement of the mother of injured Nazim, who has stated that there were other persons as well who had assaulted. The recovery of knife is at the instance of accused in absence of independent witness. The charge sheet is submitted. The accused