Allahabad High Court
TAUFEEQversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, subject to a personal bond and specified conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Taufeeq, sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with Crime No. 283 of 2025, which involved charges under several sections of the B.N.S. He asserted his innocence and relied on an interim protection order dated 09‑09‑2025. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the allegations. The Court applied the principles from Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, examining the nature of the accusation, the applicant’s antecedents, and the risk of fleeing or tampering with evidence. Concluding that the applicant was prepared to cooperate and that a case for anticipatory bail existed, the Court granted bail. The order required a personal bond of Rs 50,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions such as not tampering with evidence, not influencing witnesses, cooperating with the trial, and not leaving India without permission.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate exercise of discretion by the Court in granting anticipatory bail under Section 482 CrPC in the present case?
- Whether the applicant’s antecedents, the nature of the allegations, and the risk of tampering with evidence or fleeing justify denial of anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109(1), 115(2), 118(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 333, 352
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
- false implication
- cooperation with investigation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 2617 of 2026
Taufeeq
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Jamshed Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 72
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Mr. M.J. Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. V.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.283 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 333, 352,
115(2), 118(2), 109(1) of B.N.S., Police Station Tanda, District Rampur,
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 was granted interim protection from
arrest by Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.09.2025 passed
in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No.- 18667 of 2025. It is further submitted that
there is a cross case to the present case and the applicant's side has also
received injuries. It is also submitted that the charge sheet of the case is
submitted and the 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. 2617 of 2026
2
5. The applicant was granted interim protection from arrest by Division
Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.09.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Writ
Petition No.- 18667 of 2025 during investigation. Now the charge sheet of
the case has been filed. The applicant is ready to co-operate during trial.
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- Taufeeq 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. 2617 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…