Allahabad High Court
NITISH SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
A second anticipatory bail application cannot be entertained unless it is based on fresh grounds not previously raised.
Summary
Nitish Sharma applied for anticipatory bail in a case involving offences under Sections 323, 324, 452 and 308 IPC. This was his second anticipatory bail application after an earlier one was dismissed on 08.04.2024. The applicant argued that new facts, not previously before the court, justified the fresh application. The State opposed, contending that no new grounds were raised and the second application was therefore not maintainable. The Court held that the application was based on the same grounds as the earlier one and dismissed the anticipatory bail petition without commenting on the merits of the underlying criminal case.
Issues considered
- Whether a second anticipatory bail application can be entertained without any fresh ground.
- Whether the failure to present certain facts in the first application bars filing a fresh anticipatory bail application.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438
- Indian Penal Code — s. 308, 323, 324, 452
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- repeat application
- maintainability
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482
BNSS No. - 2365 of 2026
Nitish Sharma
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gaurav Sharma, Vinay Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA-I for the State apprised the Court that he
has received the instructions, therefore, instant anticipatory bail application
may be finally disposed off.
2. Heard Sri Vinay Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vijay
Kumar, learned AGA-I for the State.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0530 of 2023, under Sections 323, 324,
452, 308 IPC, Police Station Nai Mandi, District Muzaffarnagar with a
prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail during trial.
4. Learned counsel for applicant submits, however, this is second
anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of applicant and his earlier
anticipatory bail application has been dismissed vide order dated 08.04.2024
passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.
3080 of 2024 but at the time of first anticipatory bail application some
relevant facts could not be placed before this Court and from the record it
reflects, applicant has been falsely made accused in the present matter.
5. At this stage, learned AGA submits, as this is second anticipatory bail
application filed on behalf of applicant, therefore, it can only be entertained
on new grounds which are not available earlier and as according to learned
counsel for applicant the grounds which were though available but could not
be placed before this Court at the time of first anticipatory bail application,
therefore, instant second anticipatory bail application is not maintainable,
NABAIL No. 2365 of 2026
2
therefore, instant application should be dismissed.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the
case.
7. Considering the submission made by learned counsel for applicant it
reflects, the instant second anticipatory bail application has been filed on the
ground that earlier some relevant facts could not be placed before this Court
while deciding the first anticipatory bail application, therefore, it reflects, the
instant second anticipatory bail application has been filed on the basis of
already existed grounds which cannot be termed as new grounds.
8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the
instant anticipatory bail application is rejected.
9. It is made clear that observations made while deciding instant anticipatory
bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in
forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
March 19, 2026
AK Pandey
(Sameer Jain,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…