Allahabad High Court
LUCKY SAINIversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The court held that the accused is entitled to bail despite the alleged exhortation and monetary dispute, as these do not outweigh the presumption of innocence pending trial.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Lucky Saini, accused under Sections 109(1) and 3(5) BNS for a firearm assault on Navin Khanna. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, asserting that the actual firing was done by co‑accused Dhruv Dhawan and that a monetary dispute motivated the complaint. The State argued that the applicant was present at the scene and had a role in exhorting the shooting. After hearing both sides, the Court noted the alleged exhortation and the monetary dispute but concluded that these factors did not bar bail. Consequently, the bail petition was allowed without addressing the merits of the case, subject to a personal bond and sureties, and the applicant was directed to cooperate with the investigation.
Issues considered
- The applicability of bail to an accused alleged to have exhorted a firearm assault despite a monetary dispute with the victim
- Whether the presence of the accused at the scene and alleged participation preclude grant of bail
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 3(5)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1)
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- exhortation
- firearm assault
- monetary dispute
- anticipatory bail
- Supreme Court bail policy
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32349 of 2026
Lucky Saini
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Irshad Ahmad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Abhay Mishra, G.A., Prateek
Srivastava
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Irshad Ahmad, learned counsel for accused applicant, Sri
Ankit Shukla, learned counsel holding brief for informant and learned
A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Lucky Saini to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 456 of 2026, under
Sections 109(1), 3(5) BNS, P.S.- Civil Lines, District- Moradabad, during
the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that the accused
applicant has been falsely implicated in FIR dated 10.07.2026 lodged by
the wife of injured with the allegation that on 09.07.2026 at about 23:00
hours, the three accused persons including the accused applicant had
assaulted Navin Khanna by firearm. It is the contention of learned counsel
that the specific role of firing is attributed on the co-accused Dhruv
Dhawan. It is further contended that in the statement of the victim, it is
stated that on the exhortation of other co-accused Dhruv Dhawan has
opened fire at him. The injured suffered two entry wounds, one on his
hand and another at the back of his chest. Further submits that there is
monetary transaction between the parties which led to the false
implication. The accused applicant has criminal history of one case
wherein he is on anticipatory bail. Investigation is continuing and
applicant is co-operating in the investigation. The accused applicant is
languishing in jail since 15.07.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on
BAIL No. 32349 of 2026
2
bail.
4. Learned counsel for informant and learned A.G.A. for State have
opposed the bail application and submit that the accused applicant was
present at the place of incident and there is specific role of exhortation
attributed on the accused applicant and the injured also suffered gunshot
injury.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considering the role of exhortation attributed on the applicant, who has
also some monetary dispute with the injured, the accused/applicant is
entitled to be released on bail.
7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is
allowed.
8. The accused/applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case on
furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of court concerned in view of observation made by the
Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in
re [(2024)10SCC 685].
9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and
speedy disposal.
(Avnish Saxena,J.)
September 18, 2026
Sharad/-
Digitally signed by :-
SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…