Allahabad High Court
GULAM MOHD.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The court rejected the anticipatory bail application and directed that regular bail be considered if the applicant appears within four weeks, applying the Satender Kumar Antil guidelines.
Summary
Gulam Mohd. applied for anticipatory bail under Section 482 CrPC in connection with offences under IPC sections 147, 323, 504 and 353. The Additional Government Advocate argued that the offences do not attract imprisonment exceeding seven years, a charge‑sheet has already been filed and there is no fear of arrest, rendering the anticipatory bail plea untenable. The applicant sought permission to approach the trial court for regular bail, invoking the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI. The AGA raised no objection to this request. The High Court rejected the anticipatory bail application, directing that if the applicant appears before the trial court within four weeks and files a regular bail petition, it shall be decided in accordance with the Satender Kumar Antil principles, without being influenced by any observations of the trial court. The anticipatory bail application was therefore disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail is maintainable when the alleged offences are not punishable with imprisonment exceeding seven years and a charge‑sheet has already been filed.
- Whether the applicant may be directed to seek regular bail under the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Satender Kumar Antil.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 323, 353, 504
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- regular bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- IPC offences
- Supreme Court precedent
- bail jurisprudence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 10309 of 2026
Gulam Mohd.
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Javed Alam, Nasim Uddin
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. At the very outset, the Learned A.G.A. has raised an objection that the
offences alleged against the applicant are not punishable with
imprisonment exceeding seven years. It is further submitted that the
charge-sheet has been filed and there is no apprehension of arrest of the
applicant, therefore, the present application seeking anticipatory bail is
not maintainable.
2. After some arguments, the Learned counsel for the applicant prays that
he may be permitted to approach the concerned Court and apply for
regular bail, which may be directed to be decided in accordance with the
law laid down by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs.
Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2021) 10 SCC 773, and
the subsequent orders passed by the Supreme Court in the above-
mentioned case.
3. The Learned A.G.A. has no objection to the said prayer.
4. Taking into account the submissions made by the learned counsel for
the parties, it is directed that in case the applicant appears in Case Crime
No.412 of 2023, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 353 IPC, P.S.- Tanda,
District- Rampur, before the Court concerned within a period of four
weeks from today and applies for bail, his bail application shall be
considered and disposed of expeditiously in accordance with law laid
down by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil (supra), without
NABAIL No. 10309 of 2026
2
being influenced by any observations made by the concerned Court, while
rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the applicant.
5. With the aforesaid observations/directions, this application stands
disposed of.
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
October 1, 2026
Sachin
Digitally signed by :-
SACHIN TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…