HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11300 of 2025 Salman Ansari .....Applicant(s)

Versus State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohit Sharma, Mohammad Saem Shiraz, Mukul Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

The accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR No.09/2025 under Sections 152, 318(4), 336, 337, 340 and 61(2) BNS, Police Station ATS, Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow.

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the applicant along with other co- accused persons, was a member of a gang engaged in the illegal preparation and modification of Aadhaar cards for Bangladeshi, Rohingya, Pakistani, and Nepali nationals on the basis of forged documents. The forged Aadhaar cards were allegedly being used for obtaining Indian passports and other government benefits.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a perusal of the recovery memo reveals that no such recovery has been made which may attract the offence under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. It is further submitted that even if the prosecution case is taken at its face value, the recovery allegedly made from the applicant i.e. three laptops, two optical fingerprint scanners, one iris scanner, one web camera, one hard disk, two solid state drives, one multimedia mobile phone with SIM card, three bank cards, one driving licence, six enrolment slips, one iris scan print, three Aadhaar cards, one birth certificate, one printer, and one die cutter, does not constitute any offence under Section 152 BNS. The remaining offences are punishable with imprisonment up to seven years.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused Himanshu Rai who was assigned similar role has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 03.11.2025 passed in criminal misc. bail application No. 10151 of 2025. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks parity with the order of the co-accused.

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant may not be permitted to leave the district without prior permission of the learned trial court. He has further submitted that the applicant has been found to have financial transactions with the co-accused persons. However, from the record, he could not show any prima facie material to attract the offence under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record.

On due consideration to the facts that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, has been in custody since 12.06.2025, the investigation is still in progress, and the FIR appears to have been registered on the basis of recovery from which the prima facie ingredients to attract Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita are missing, co-accused Himanshu Rai has been granted bail, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail on the ground of parity.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity, subject to the condition that the applicant shall not leave the district without prior permission of the learned trial court.

Let the applicant Salman Ansari, be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

(iii) the applicant shall appear