Allahabad High Court

AVID ALI @ ABID ALIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 9 February 2026
Bench: ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA

Holding

The court granted bail to the accused, subject to conditions.

Summary

Avid Ali, accused under IPC sections 147, 148, 307 and 504 for a shooting incident, filed a third bail application after two earlier rejections. The applicant argued that the key eyewitness, Babar Ali, had withdrawn his earlier statement implicating him and that there was no medical evidence of injury, while noting that co‑accused had already been released on bail. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the applicant’s extensive criminal record and the seriousness of the offences. The court examined the nature of the charges, the risk of witness tampering, and the prima facie case, and, without deciding on the merits, found sufficient grounds to grant bail with conditions. Consequently, the High Court ordered the applicant’s release on personal bond and sureties, subject to strict conditions on non‑tampering, non‑criminal activity, and regular court appearances.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to an accused with a serious charge and extensive criminal antecedents.
Whether the withdrawal of an eyewitness statement and lack of medical evidence affect the prima facie case for bail.
Whether there is a reasonable risk of witness tampering justifying denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — s. 183
Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 307, 504

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
IPC
witness tampering
habitual offender
anticipatory bail
prima facie case

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41068 of 2025

Avid Ali @ Abid Ali
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashish Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Mohd Faiz, Shams Tabrez Alam
Ansari

Court No. - 68
HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard Sri Ashish Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh
Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the records. Sri Mohd.
Faiz, learned counsel for the first informant has also been heard in
opposition to the bail application.

This is the third bail application filed on behalf of the applicant Avid Ali @
Abid Ali with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 27 of 2024,
under Sections 147, 148, 307, 504 IPC, Police Station C. B. Ganj, District
Bareilly, during the pendency of the trial. The first bail application of the
applicant was rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order
dated 26.09.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 32572of
2024 while the second bail application was rejected by this Court vide order
dated 01.04.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail application No. 1430 of
2025. The applicant is languishing in jail since 07.07.2024.

Learned counsel while pressing the third bail application has reiterated the
entire submissions made in the second bail application. He further submits
that t his Court denied the second bail to the applicant being of the view that
the applicant was named in the FIR. Babar Ali, eye witness of the incident
had specifically assigned the role of firing to the applicant and that the
applicant was a habitual offender having 22 cases (31 cases shown in the
rejection order of the trial court) and involved in heinous crimes, as such was
not entitled to be released on bail.

Learned counsel for the applicant has vehemently argued that the witness
BAIL No. 41068 of 2025
2

Babar Ali in his deposition as PW2 has resiled from his earlier statement
under Section 183 BNSS and has stated that his statement was incorrectly
recorded by the Investigating Officer. He was at his house when he heard 4
fun shots. Abid had no previous enmity nor he indulged in any mar-peet.
Learned counsel has passed on the certified copy of the statement of Babar
Ali recorded as PW2 which is taken on record. Learned counsel next submits
that the present case is a case of no injury and there is no medical report of
the injured Shaukat Ali. It is next submitted that accused Wajid Ali has been
enlarged on bail by the Sessions Judge, Bareilly vide order dated 24.02.2025
itself. The co-accused Naser Ali and Mohd. Suhil have been granted
anticipatory bail by the trial court till the conclusion of the trial. The PW1
injured in his statement has also not assigned any role of firing to the
applicant. It is also argued that the Investigating Officer wrongly drawn the
site plan and the same is evident from the statement of PW1. The criminal
antecedents of the applicant have been duly explained in Para 2 of the
supplementary affidavit. The charge sheet against the applicant has been
submitted on 11.08.2024. There are 12 witnesses and only 2 persecution
witnesses have been examined so far. The witnesses have not supported the
FIR version. The applicant undertakes to cooperate with the trial and shall
not misuse the liberty of bail, if released on bail. Hence bail has been prayed
for.

Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently
opposed the prayer of bail on the ground of criminal history of the applicant
but could not dispute the above submissions raised by learned counsel for
the applicant.

Considering all those facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations,
severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting
evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima-
facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made
out.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

Let the accused-applicant, Avid Ali @ Abid Ali, involved in above
mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a
personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:
BAIL No. 41068 of 2025
3

1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and
co-operate in the trial.

4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the
trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by
the court concerned.

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below
will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

February 10, 2026
pks
(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…