DILSHADversusSTATE OF U.P.

             HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
            CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26870 of 2025

Dilshad
                                                            .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus

State of U.P.
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Akhilesh Kumar, Shree Prakash Giri
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Syed Faiz Hasnain, Adil Jamal, G.A.,
                                Mohd. Hasham, Shabeh Jamal

Court No. - 66
(Sl. No. 55 out of 150)

                          HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri Shree Prakash Giri, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Syed
Raza, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri Syed Faiz Hasnain, learned
counsel for the informant as well as Sri J.K. Chaurasia, learned State Law
Officer and perused the material placed on record.

3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime
No. 278 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 103(1) BNS, Police
Station Nagfani, District Moradabad, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

4. As per prosecution story, the deceased was stabbed first of all by co-
accused Shahnavaz and thereafter the applicant alongwith Sarfaraz had
assaulted him with knives. There are allegations of having fired at the
deceased against co-accused Shakil @ Anda on 15.11.2024 at about 2.30
pm.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The
deceased expired on the spot and the FIR is delayed by about five hours, as
such, the delay speaks volume of the fact that there was no eye-witness
account of the incident but subsequently, eye-witnesses have been roped in
by the prosecution. The applicant and the co-accused person Sarfaraz have
been assigned simple role by the informant in the FIR.
                                                            BAIL No. 26870 of 2025
                                  2


6. Learned counsel has further stated that the co-accused Sarfaraz has been
enlarged on bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide its order dated
27.5.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14265 of 2025.
Although the said bail has been granted to him on the ground that the two
witnesses, Waseem and Naseem have assigned the role of catching hold the
deceased to co-accused person Shamshad Hussain but otherwise, the case of
bail of the applicant is also made out as the video footage of the place of
occurrence was also perused by the investigating officer and the applicant is
not visible in the said footage. The only persons visible are co-accused
persons Ikram, his brother Shahnavaz @ Mulla and Ehsan.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has no
criminal history. He is in jail since 18.11.2024, as such, period of
incarceration is more than one year. In case, the applicant is released on bail,
he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

8. Per contra, learned State Law Officer and learned counsel for the
informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that
the said video footage in which the applicant is not visible is of 14-15
seconds only, whereas the incident took place for more than one minute. The
deceased sustained as many as twenty injuries. The incident occurred at two
places, as the deceased was assaulted twice by all the accused persons.

9. Learned counsel for the informant has further stated that the applicant is
named in the FIR. It is stated that applicant carried motive of the offence, as
he had married the wife of deceased. The eye-witnesses have assigned the
role of assault to the applicant. There are ample stab wounds, which if
counted separately, may be more than thirty blows, as such, the applicant is
not entitled for bail.

10. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into
consideration the fact that the deceased has sustained as many as twenty stab
wounds and the incident took lace at two places and the said video footage is
of short duration, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.
The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected.

11. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial
court be decided expeditiously as early as possible in view of the principle as
                                                                                              BAIL No. 26870 of 2025
                                                                     3


                                    has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the
                                    cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain
                                    and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal
                                    impediment.

                                    12. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts
                                    brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the
                                    said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.



                                                                                               (Krishan Pahal,J.)
                                    March 18, 2026
                                    Shalini




Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad