Allahabad High Court
MITTHU MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- JAI PRAKASH TIWARI
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied because the FIR contains specific allegations against the applicant and no sufficient ground exists to justify bail.
Summary
The applicant, Mitthu Mishra, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the CrPC in a case (Crime No. 63/2025) involving alleged offences under Sections 8 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. He claimed innocence and asserted that the allegations were false, seeking bail to avoid arrest during trial. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, pointed out that the FIR specifically named the applicant among six accused, indicating concrete charges. The Court examined the FIR and found that the allegations against the applicant were specific and that no sufficient ground existed to grant anticipatory bail. Consequently, the Court rejected the anticipatory bail application, noting that the order does not prejudice the merits of the pending criminal case.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the CrPC in view of specific allegations in the FIR.
- Whether the presence of specific charges against the applicant negates the requirement for anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- NDPS Act
- specific allegations
- bail denial
- FIR
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 2569 of 2026
Mitthu Mishra
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raj Raghuvanshi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Rajeev Kumar
Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on
record.
This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant
seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 63/2025 under Sections -
8/22 Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,1985, and
Section- 111 of BNS Police Station - Rohaniya District - Varanasi, during
the pendency of trial.
Urge has been made on behalf of the applicant that the applicant has no
concern with the offence alleged against him. The applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in this case. No offence has been
committed by the applicant. In case the applicant is granted anticipatory
bail, there is no possibility of misusing the liberty of anticipatory bail.
Learned A.G.A. has contended that the accusation levelled against the
applicant is specific.
Insofar as the allegations are concerned, the same is very much apparent
from the record that the FIR has been lodged against six accused persons
including the applicant. It is also apparent that specific allegation has been
made in the FIR against the present applicant. In this case, bare perusal of
the first information report itself shows that the allegations are specific
NABAIL No. 2569 of 2026
2
against the applicant. No good ground is made out for anticipatory bail. In
case the applicant has any grievance, he may avail remedy before the
appropriate forum.
Consequently, the instant anticipatory bail application is rejected.
It is made clear that observation made in this order shall have no bearing
on the merits of the case.
(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
May 6, 2026
S.K.
Digitally signed by :-
SWEETY KANOJIA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…