Allahabad High Court

IMRAN @ ROMIYOversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 17 September 2026
Bench: AVNISH SAXENA

Holding

The court held that the accused is entitled to bail as the alleged assault was a result of sudden provocation and there is reasonable doubt about the prosecution's case.

Summary

The accused, Imran @ Romiyo, applied for bail in a case (Crime No. 565 of 2025) involving alleged assault with a knife and a blunt object under several IPC sections. He contended that he was falsely implicated, that the assault resulted from sudden provocation, and that the injuries to the two victims were caused by different weapons, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. The State opposed the bail, but the court noted the presence of multiple weapons, the alleged provocation, the applicant's clean criminal record, and corroborative statements suggesting other assailants. Relying on Supreme Court precedents on bail policy, the court decided that the applicant was entitled to bail without addressing the merits of the case. Consequently, the court ordered his release on personal bond and two sureties, directing him to cooperate with the judicial process.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite charges under IPC sections 109, 118, 351, 352 and 117.
Whether the alleged sudden provocation and involvement of multiple weapons affect the bail eligibility.
Whether the lack of prior criminal history and the presence of contradictory evidence justify bail.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 117, 118, 351, 352

Subjects

bail
false implication
assault
knife injury
IPC sections
Sudden provocation
Supreme Court bail precedent
Criminal trial

Judgment

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.

2. 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.

3. 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
BAIL No. 32435 of 2026
2

applicant is languishing in jail since 25.03.2026. He seeks enlargement of
accused on bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. for State opposed the bail application.

5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Considering two weapons allegedly involved in the incident. The
assaulting of two injured is due to grave and sudden provocation, 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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…