Allahabad High Court
FAKEER CHANDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- JAI PRAKASH TIWARI
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted till the end of the trial when the nature of the allegations and the applicant's role do not pose a risk of tampering with evidence or fleeing.
Summary
The applicant, Fakeer Chand, sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the CrPC in a case (Crime No. 322 of 2023) involving alleged offences under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 308 of the IPC. He claimed innocence, alleging false implication and that a charge sheet had already been filed against him and a co‑accused, rendering custodial interrogation unnecessary. The State, represented by the Advocate General, opposed the bail. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (2020) 5 SCC 1, the court examined the nature of the offences, the applicant’s role, and the risk of tampering with evidence or fleeing. Finding that the circumstances justified bail, the court granted anticipatory bail until the trial’s conclusion, subject to a personal bond and specific conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 482 CrPC in view of the alleged offences.
- Whether the nature of the offences and the applicant's role warrant the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether anticipatory bail can be continued till the conclusion of the trial subject to conditions.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 308, 323, 504, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- IPC offences
- bail conditions
- high court
- Uttar Pradesh
- false implication
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 1332 of 2026
Fakeer Chand
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Brahma Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the record.
2. This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant seeking anticipatory
bail in Case Crime No. 322 of 2023 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 IPC, Police
Station Jansath, District Muzaffar Nagar.
3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present matter due to ulterior motive.
He next submits that in the incident both the sides sustained injuries and from the side
of applicant also a FIR has been lodged against son of O.P. No.2 and others. It is next
submitted that charge sheet has already been filed against the applicant and co-
accused Jaipal on 24.12.2023, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of
the applicant. It is next submitted that applicant is having apprehension of arrest by the
police any time in the above-mentioned case. If the applicant is enlarged on bail, he
will not misuse the liberty and will cooperate with the investigation/trial.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5
SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the law on the subject finally by holding
that the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate
case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial. It has been further held therein that
anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused,
continue after filing of the charge sheet till trial. It has been further held by the
Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory
bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the
likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence
including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the
country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by
NABAIL No. 1332 of 2026
2
considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the
applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory
bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.
7. Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, nature of
accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case,
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case
for anticipatory bail to the applicant till the trial.
8. The application is allowed accordingly.
9. In the event of arrest of the applicant-Fakeer Chand shall be released on
anticipatory bail till the end of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with
two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the
following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall make himself/herself available before the Investigating
Officer/Court concerned on the date fixed in the matter and will cooperate in the
investigation/trial.
(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/her
from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court
and if he/she has passport, the same shall be deposited by him/her before the
S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.
10. In case of default of any of the conditions, the same may be a ground for
cancellation of protection granted to the applicant.
May 12, 2026
KK Patel
(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHN KANT PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…