Allahabad High Court
ALI AHMADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The High Court declined to quash the FIR but directed that the bail application be decided by the trial court in line with the Supreme Court’s Antil judgment.
Summary
Petitioner Ali Ahmad filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the FIR dated 06-04-2026 registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. During hearing, the petitioner withdrew the challenge to the FIR and instead sought a direction that the lower court consider his bail application in accordance with the Supreme Court decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI. The State, represented by the Attorney General, did not oppose this equitable request. The High Court refused the prayer to quash the FIR but disposed of the writ by directing that any bail application be decided by the trial court following the Antil precedent. Consequently, the interim order, if any, was discharged.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can entertain a writ petition solely to seek a direction on bail after the petitioner withdraws the challenge to the FIR
- Whether the lower court must decide the bail application in accordance with the Supreme Court's guidelines in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 419, 420, 467, 468, 471
Subjects
- bail
- FIR challenge
- criminal miscellaneous writ
- IPC sections 419,420,467,468,471
- Supreme Court precedent
- High Court disposition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10169 of 2026
Ali Ahmad
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashutosh Mishra, Ashwani Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 49
HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J.
HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, the learned counsel for petitioner and the
learned A.G.A. for State-respondents 1 & 2.
2. Perused the record.
3. Petitioner-Ali Ahmad has approached this Court by means of present
Criminal Misc. Writ Petition challenging the FIR dated 06.04.2026
lodged by first informant-respondent-3, Sri Satyadev Tiwari and
registered as Case Crime No. 0058 of 2026, under Section 419, 420, 467,
468, 471 IPC, Police Station-Phaphamau, District- Prayagraj.
4. After some arguments, the learned counsel for petitioner fairly gave up
the challenge to the impugned FIR. He submits that interest of justice
shall better be served, in case, a direction is issued by this court to Court
below to consider the bail application of petitioner in the light of law laid
down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau
of Investigation and another (2021) 10 SCC 773.
5. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State-respondents 1, 2 & 3 does not
oppose the equitable submissions urged by the learned counsel for
petitioner.
6. In view of above, the prayer prayed for by means of present writ
petition is refused.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
CRLP No. 10169 of 2026
2
A.G.A. representing State-respondents 1 to 4 and upon perusal of record,
this writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction that in case,
petitioner appears before Court below and apples for bail then his bail
application shall be decided by Court below in the light of the law laid
down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (Supra).
8. Interim order, if any, stands discharged
(Padam Narain Mishra,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)
May 5, 2026
Israr
Digitally signed by :-
ISRAR AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…