Allahabad High Court

PATIRAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 29 September 2026
Bench: RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA

Holding

The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting bail subject to conditions.

Summary

The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Patiram under Section 482 of the CrPC in connection with charges under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and Section 420 of the IPC. The applicant had been arrested on the spot while driving a vehicle carrying 400 bags of rice meant for the public distribution system, but was released by police because the offences did not carry a punishment exceeding seven years. The counsel highlighted that co‑accused Aslam @ Noor Islam and Sanjay Singh had previously been granted anticipatory bail in similar cases, and that the applicant had no criminal antecedents and was cooperating with the investigation. The State opposed bail, arguing that the applicant had no genuine apprehension of arrest and could obtain regular bail. After weighing the facts, the Court found no reason to deny bail and ordered that anticipatory bail be granted subject to standard conditions, directing the applicant to appear before the trial court and furnish a bond.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482 CrPC when the alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years.
Whether the applicant’s release by police and lack of criminal antecedents justify granting anticipatory bail.
Whether the applicant’s alleged apprehension of arrest is sufficient to merit anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Essential Commodities Act — s. 3, 7
Indian Penal Code — s. 420

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 482 CrPC
Essential Commodities Act
IPC 420
public distribution system
bail conditions
non‑violent offence

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 10215 of 2026

Patiram
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hemant Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.

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

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicant in Case Crime No.48 of 2023, under Section 3/7 Essential
Commodities Act and Section 420 I.P.C., Police Station Kakod, District
Bulandshahar, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the
applicant apprehends his arrest in the abovementioned case.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was
arrested by the police on the spot while allegedly driving a DCM vehicle
carrying four hundred bags of rice which was to be distributed to eligible
ration card holders as the same belongs to the public distribution system.
Learned counsel has stated that the applicant was released by the police as
the offences in question were not punishable with punishment of more
than seven years. Learned counsel has further submitted that co-accused
Aslam @ Noor Islam has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in
ABAIL No.8028 of 2023 and Sanjay Singh has been granted anticipatory
bail by this Court in NABAIL No. 6452 of 2026. Learned counsel has
submitted that a charge sheet has been filed and the applicant is no longer
required for any custodial interrogation or recoveries.

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has contended that
the offences in question in the event of a conviction do not entail
NABAIL No. 10215 of 2026
2

imprisonment of more than seven years. The applicant has no
apprehension of arrest. He may appear before the concerned court and
may apply for regular bail.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for
the parties.

6. Similarly situated co-accused Aslam @ Noor Islam and Sanjay Singh
have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. The applicant although
was arrested on the spot but was released by the police. There is no
allegation of the applicant not cooperating with the investigation. The
applicant has no criminal antecedents.

7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it
appropriate to enlarge applicant on anticipatory bail.

8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant
is allowed.

9. The applicant - Patiram shall appear before the trial Court within four
weeks from today and shall be released on bail on filing his personal bond
and surety to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following
conditions:-

i. The applicant shall remain present before the trial Court on each date
fixed unless exempted by the trial Court;

ii. The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police
officer;

iii. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of
the Court;

iv. The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;

10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
NABAIL No. 10215 of 2026
3

11. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively
for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be
considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case.

(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
September 30, 2026
A. Pandey

Digitally signed by :-
ANAND PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…