Allahabad High Court

ASHAN @ AHASAN AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 29 September 2026
Bench: VIVEK KUMAR SINGH

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicants.

Summary

The applicants sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the CrPC in a case involving alleged offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 109(1), 131, 333, 352 and 351(3) of the Indian Penal Code. They claimed the FIR was filed under pressure and that affidavits from the injured parties indicated the injuries were accidental. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the affidavits. The court noted that the offence under Section 109(1) is non‑compoundable, but observed that the informant had personally affirmed the affidavits, raising a possibility of false implication. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the court deemed it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail, subject to standard conditions and a personal bond. The order directs that the applicants be released immediately upon arrest, provided they comply with the stipulated conditions.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482 of the CrPC when the alleged offences include a non‑compoundable offence (Section 109(1) IPC).
Whether the affidavits of the injured parties and the claim of pressure in filing the FIR affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Whether the grant of anticipatory bail to a co‑accused influences the decision on bail for the present applicants.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1), 131, 191(2), 191(3), 333, 351(3), 352

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 482 CrPC
non‑compoundable offence
false implication
affidavit
Uttar Pradesh
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 10235 of 2026

Ashan @ Ahasan And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chandra Bir Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 72
HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicants, the Learned A.G.A. for the
State and perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicants in Case Crime No. 171 of 2026, under Sections 191(2), 191(3),
109(1), 131, 333, 352, 351(3) BNS, Police Station- Medical College,
District Meerut, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail as the
applicants apprehend their arrest in the above-mentioned case.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants has contended that the FIR was
lodged by the informant under pressure of some persons who had an axe
to grind with the applicants and the other accused. The FIR was lodged
against six named accused, for injuries received by two persons namely
Ummed Ali and Ishraq. Learned counsel has submitted that affidavits
were filed by the injured before the Senior Superintendent of Police,
Meerut but the Investigating Officer did not record the said affidavits in
the case diaries. The affidavits clearly stated that the injured Ishraq had
received injuries due to an accident and the FIR was lodged under
pressure of some persons. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. It
is further submitted that identically situated co-accused Anas has been
granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order
dated 21.09.2026, passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.
9115 of 2026.
NABAIL No. 10235 of 2026
2

4. The learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute the
fact that the informant and the injured have filed their affidavits in favor
of the applicants and the accused.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
parties.

6. Although, offence under Section 109(1) of the BNS is a non
compoundable offence and a compromise affidavit cannot be taken note
of but a perusal of the record indicates that while considering the bail
application of the co-accused, Imran alias Sabbal, the informant had
appeared personally before the Court and had attested to the genuineness
of the affidavit so filed. In view of this finding given by the concerned
court, the false implication of the applicants, cannot be ruled out. Even
Learned AGA from the instructions could not point out any injury which
has been opined to be dangerous to life.

7. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case and
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it fit to
enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail.

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

9. In the event of the arrest of the applicants Ashan, Afraj, they shall be
released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on
furnishing a personal bond and surety each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court
concerned with the following conditions:-

i. the applicants shall make himself available for interrogation by a police
officer as and when required;

ii. that the applicants 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. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous
NABAIL No. 10235 of 2026
3

permission of the Court;

iv. that the applicants 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.

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.

(Vivek Kumar Singh,J.)
September 30, 2026
A.P. Pandey

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…