Allahabad High Court
NAWAB ANSARI @ GUDDU WARSI @ FITWELL TAILORversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that, given the applicant's alleged innocence, lack of flight risk, and the applicable legal principles, anticipatory bail should be granted.
Summary
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Nawab Ansari (also known as Guddu Warsi and Fitwell Tailor) in a case involving alleged offences under Sections 411, 413, 414, 420, 467 and 468 of the IPC and Sections 41 and 102 of the CrPC. The applicant claimed innocence, stating that his name only appeared in the confessional statements of four arrested persons and that forged truck documents were recovered. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the charges. Referring to the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, the Court examined the nature of the accusation, the applicant’s antecedents, and the risk of flight or tampering. Finding that the criteria for anticipatory bail were satisfied, the Court granted bail with a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and specific conditions, reserving the right to cancel bail for non‑compliance.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC in view of the alleged offences.
- Whether the nature and gravity of the accusations, the applicant's role, and the risk of flight or evidence tampering justify denial of bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed are sufficient to safeguard the investigation and trial.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 102, 41
- Indian Penal Code — s. 411, 413, 414, 420, 467, 468
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Indian Penal Code
- false implication
- bail conditions
- confessional statements
- court discretion
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 2323 of 2026
Nawab Ansari @ Guddu Warsi @ Fitwell Tailor
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhinav Tripathi, Devashish Mitra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 72
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Devashish Mitra, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. J.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. 171 of 2024, under Sections 411, 413, 414, 420, 467, 468 of
I.P.C. and Section 41/102 Cr.P.C., Police Station Hafizganj, District
Bareilly, 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 applicant is not named in the first information report and
his name was surfaced in the confessional statement of four arrested persons.
It is further submitted that some forged papers of various trucks were
recovered. 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. As per first information report, four persons were arrested and some
forged papers of various trucks are said to have been recovered and the name
NABAIL No. 2323 of 2026
2
of the applicant was surfaced in the confessional statement of arrested
persons.
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- Nawab Ansari @ Guddu Warsi
@ Fitwell Tailor 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.
NABAIL No. 2323 of 2026
3
10. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty 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…