UMESH KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 2356 of 2026

Umesh Kumar And Another
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)               :   Sandeep Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)          :   G.A.

Court No. - 72
                 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

1. Heard Mr. Sandeep Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants,
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. 305 of 2005, under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3) and
340(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Garautha, District- Jhansi with the prayer
that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail.

3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that
applicants are innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It
is further submitted that the co-accused Manoj Kumar Gupta has already
been granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court, vide order dated
13.02.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s
482 BNSS No. 1478 of 2026. It is further submitted that the applicants are
said to have received certain amount from the Tokiyo Insurance Company
in their bank accounts, for which, they are not eligible and now they are
willing to refund the same. It was also submitted that applicants undertake
to co-operate during trial and they would appear as and when required by
the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case,
applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they 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
                                                     NABAIL No. 2356 of 2026
                               2


anticipatory bail and it has been submitted by him that applicant no. 1 has
received an amount of Rs. 1,16,000/- and applicant no. 2 has received Rs.
1,07,000/- in their bank accounts, respectively.

5. As per first information report, the applicants are said to have
received Rs. 1,16,000/- & Rs. 1,07,000/- in their bank accounts,
respectively from the Tokiyo Insurance Company, for which, they are not
eligible and now they are willing to refund the same. Co-accused Manoj
Kumar Gupta has already been granted interim anticipatory bail by this
Court, vide order dated 13.02.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory
Bail Application u/s 482 BNSS No. 1478 of 2026.

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 applicants 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 applicants- Umesh Kumar & Smt.
Poonam Devi 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 applicants shall not tamper with evidence and that they would
appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the
Court concerned;
                                                                                          NABAIL No. 2356 of 2026
                                                                   3


                                    (ii) 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any
                                    police officer;

                                    (iii) The applicants would co-operate during trial and would not misuse
                                    the liberty of bail.

                                    (iv) The applicants 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
                                    to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted
                                    to the applicants.



                                                                                    (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
                                    March 19, 2026
                                    Rama Kant




Digitally signed by :-
RAMA KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad