Allahabad High Court
DEEPAK KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting bail with conditions.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad entertained an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the CrPC filed by Deepak Kumar, who was implicated in a case under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. The FIR named a co‑accused, Mohd. Ahmad, for filling LPG in a vehicle registered in Kumar’s name, but Kumar was not named in the FIR and claimed innocence. The applicant pledged cooperation with the investigation and assured compliance with bail conditions. Citing 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, and found a case for anticipatory bail. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions restricting tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, leaving India, and ensuring trial attendance.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 482 CrPC in a case arising under the Essential Commodities Act.
- Whether the applicant’s alleged involvement, as inferred from the vehicle registration, warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the applicant’s antecedents and willingness to cooperate satisfy the criteria for anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Essential Commodities Act — s. 3, 7
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- Essential Commodities Act
- bail conditions
- FIR
- vehicle registration
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 2368 of 2026
Deepak Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Bind, Sahdev Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 72
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Bind, learned counsel for the
applicant, Mr. Umashankar Mishra, 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. 731 of 2025, under Sections 3/7 of
Essential Commodities Act, Police Station- Chandpur, District-
Bijnor 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
during investigation. 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.
NABAIL No. 2368 of 2026
2
5. As per first information report, co-accused Mohd. Ahmad
was found filling L.P.G. in a vehicle which has been registered
in the name of the applicant.
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- Deepak Kumar
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.
NABAIL No. 2368 of 2026
3
(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 to file appropriate application for cancellation of
anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
March 19, 2026
Rama Kant
Digitally signed by :-
RAMA KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…