Allahabad High Court
PYAR MOHAMMAD @ ALIYAS AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The Court held that the applicants are entitled to bail.
Summary
The applicants, Pyar Mohammad @ Aliyas and Hakikat, were charged under Sections 109(1) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly opening fire on a police party, although no police officer was injured. They have a criminal history of more than ten cases, most of which relate to the Electricity Act, and are presently on bail in those matters. The learned counsel highlighted that co‑accused in the present case had already been released on bail, and argued that the applicants' prior cases should not preclude bail. The State opposed the bail but did not dispute the factual submissions. The Court held that the applicants' antecedents and the facts of the case did not justify denial of bail and ordered their release on personal bond with two sureties each, subject to standard conditions. The order expressly limited its observations to the bail application and did not prejudice the merits of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under the Arms Act and IPC despite a serious charge of firing at police and a substantial criminal record.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25, 27, 3
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1)
Subjects
- bail
- Arms Act
- Indian Penal Code
- criminal antecedents
- non‑injury
- electricity act
- personal bond
- sureties
- court conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3335 of 2026
Pyar Mohammad @ Aliyas And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajaj Ahmad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Heard Sri Ajaj Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicants and Dr. S. B.
Maurya, learned AGA for the State-respondent.
2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicants on
bail in Case Crime No. 385 of 2025, under Sections 109(1) BNS & 3/25/27
Arms Act, Police Station Narkhi, District Firozabad, during pendency of the
trial in the court below.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that as per allegation
applicants and others opened fire upon police party but admittedly none
police personal sustained any injury and therefore, it appears on the basis of
false allegation police implicated them in the instant matter.
4. He further submitted that actually applicants are having criminal history
of more than ten cases and therefore, police was highly inimical with them
and only due to this reason police implicated them in the present matter
alongwith others.
5. He further submitted that entire criminal history of the applicants have
been explained in the supplementary affidavit dated 26.2.2026 filed in
support to the instant bail application.
6. He further submitted that from perusal of the supplementary affidavit filed
by the applicant it reflects applicant no. 1 has been made accused in majority
of the cases relating to Electricity Act and even number of cases are of
Electricity Act against applicant no. 2. He next submitted that in all the cases
both the applicants are on bail. He further submitted that even in the present
BAIL No. 3335 of 2026
2
matter number of accused persons including Shamshad and Naeem have
been released on bail vide order dated 20.2.2026 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail
Application No. 1880 of 2026 and 1821 of 2026 and as far as allegations are
concerned, case of applicants are at par with them.
7. He further submitted that applicants are in jail in the present matter since
12.11.2025.
8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute
the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the
case.
10. However, as per allegations applicants alongwith others opened fire upon
the police party but admittedly none of the police person sustained any
injury.
11. Further, however, it appears applicants are having criminal history of
more than 10 cases but their entire criminal history has been explained in the
instant bail application and majority of the cases appears to be of Electricity
Act and in all the cases applicants are on bail and considering their criminal
antecedents and facts of the case, in view of this Court, it is not proper to
withhold their bail application merely on the basis of their criminal
antecedents.
12. Further, even number of other co-accused have been released on bail by
co-ordinate Bench of this Court and case of applicants is at par with them.
13. Further, applicants are in jail in the present matter since 12.11.2025.
14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed
above, in my view, applicants are entitled to be released on bail.
15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the instant bail application is allowed.
16. Let the applicants-Pyar Mohammad @ Aliyas and Hakikat, 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 the court concerned
with the following conditions:-
BAIL No. 3335 of 2026
3
(i) The applicants shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless
his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat
or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or
tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
17. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be
at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the
bail of the applicants.
18. 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.
April 20, 2026
Ankita
(Sameer Jain,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ANKITA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…