Disposed¶17

Samir Langda @ Mohammad Samir v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC7 May 2026CRLP/9747/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; Criminal Misc. Writ Petition 9747 of 2026; FIR challenge; Case Crime No. 0106 of 2026; Section 331(4), 305 BNS; P.S. Jhunsi, District Prayagraj; bail application direction; Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2021) 10 SCC 773; prayer refused; interim order discharged; disposed of finally.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of finally with a direction to the Court concerned to decide the petitioner's bail application in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil; the principal prayer in the writ petition was refused and any interim order stood discharged. ¶17

Samir Langda @ Mohammad Samir vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9747 of 2026

¶3

Samir Langda @ Mohammad Samir

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. And 2 Others	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Jawed Ahamad, Ruhi Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 49

¶8

HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J. HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J.

¶9

Heard Mr. Jawed Ahamad, the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned A.G.A. for State-respondents 1 & 2.

¶10

Perused the record.

¶11

Petitioner-Samir Langda @ Mohammad Samir has approached this Court by means of present criminal misc. writ petition challenging the FIR dated 01.04.2026 lodged by first informant-respondent-3 Vikash Kumar Mishra and registered as Case Crime No. 0106 of 2026, under Section 331(4), 305 BNS, Police Station-Jhunsi, District-Prayagraj.

¶12

After some arguments, the learned counsel for petitioner fairly gave up the prayer prayed for by means of present writ petition. It is, however, contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that in the facts and circumstances of the case, interest of justice shall better be served, in case, the present writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to Court concerned to decide the bail application of petitioner in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2021) 10 SCC 773 .

¶13

Learned A.G.A. for State-respondents 1 & 2 has no objection to the aforesaid prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner.

¶14

In view of above, the prayer prayed for by means of present writ petition is refused.

¶15

CRLP No. 9747 of 2026

¶16

¶17

Having heard the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned A.G.A. for State-respondents 1 & 2, upon perusal of record and considering the submissions urged by the learned counsel for petitioner, this writ petition shall stand disposed of finally with a direction to Court concerned that in case, petitioner appear before Court below and applies for bail then his bail application shall be decided by Court concerned in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (Supra) .

¶18

Interim order, if any, stands discharged.

¶19

May 7, 2026

¶20

Vinay

¶21

(Padam Narain Mishra,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)

¶22

Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Samir Langda @ Mohammad Samir v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samir Langda @ Mohammad Samir v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Kumar Maurya vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Rakesh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sachin Sharma vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Shravan Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohammed Ghufran Dehelvi vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Suman Devi vs State of U.P. and 5 Others