Allahabad High Court
VISHALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting bail subject to conditions.
Summary
The applicant Vishal, the younger brother‑in‑law of the informant, was implicated in a criminal case (Crime No. 370 of 2025) alleging outraging the modesty of the informant's daughter, among other offences. He filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, asserting his innocence and claiming the dispute was purely matrimonial. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the allegations. The Court, referring to the principles laid down in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, considered the nature and gravity of the accusation, the applicant’s antecedents, and the risk of flight before deciding that a case for anticipatory bail existed. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail with a personal bond and specific conditions, reserving the right to cancel bail for non‑compliance.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 CrPC in view of the allegations of outraging modesty.
- Whether the nature and gravity of the offences, antecedents of the accused, and risk of fleeing justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 127(2), 333, 351(2), 352, 75, 85
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- outraging modesty
- Indian Penal Code
- bail conditions
- flight risk
- maternity dispute
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 2015 of 2026
Vishal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Jaiswal, Rajendra Pratap
Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 72
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Rajendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant,
Mr. B.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in
Case Crime No. 370 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 117(2), 109, 127(2),
352, 351(2), 85, 75, 333 of B.N.S., Police Station Madhuban Bapudham,
District Ghaziabad, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant
may be released on bail.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that
applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is
further submitted that the present dispute is purely matrimonial dispute
and the applicant is younger brother-in-law of the informant and he has
not assigned role of outraging modesty of the daughter of the first
informant. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate
during trial and he would appear as and when required by the
investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is
granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will
co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for
anticipatory bail.
5. The applicant is younger brother-in-law of the informant.and it has
NABAIL No. 2015 of 2026
2
been alleged that he outraged the modesty of the daughter of the first
informant.
6. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v.
State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble
Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider
nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of
accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available
material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the
accused has also to be taken into consideration.
7. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding
anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, role
of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without
expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.
8. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
9. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Vishal involved in the aforesaid
case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail 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 not tamper with evidence and that he would appear
before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court
concerned;
(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/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any
police officer;
(iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the
liberty of bail.
(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the
Court concerned.
10. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty
NABAIL No. 2015 of 2026
3
to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted
to the applicant.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
March 18, 2026
Virendra
Digitally signed by :-
VIRENDRA KUMAR BHARTEEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…