Allahabad High Court
AMIT SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- JAI PRAKASH TIWARI
Holding
The Court held that there was no good ground for granting anticipatory bail as the allegations were specific, serious, and prima facie supported.
Summary
The applicant, Amit Singh, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the CrPC in a case (Crime No. 175 of 2025) involving alleged offences under IPC sections 105, 115(2), 352, 351(3) and 3(5) arising from a property dispute. He claimed innocence, no prior criminal record, and that he was falsely implicated, having already obtained interim anticipatory bail on 1‑April‑2026. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, argued that the allegations were specific, serious, and supported by the FIR, investigation material, and independent witness statements, alleging assault with a wooden stick that led to the death of the informant. The Court examined the FIR, charge‑sheet and material evidence, finding the accusations prima facie established and the nature of the crime grave. Consequently, the Court concluded there was no sufficient ground to grant anticipatory bail and rejected the application, without commenting on the merits of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the FIR contains specific and serious allegations supported by prima facie evidence.
- Whether the applicant's claim of false implication and lack of prior criminal record warrants anticipatory bail.
- Whether the nature of the alleged offences (assault leading to death) precludes anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 105, 115(2), 3(5), 351(3), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- IPC offences
- false implication
- property dispute
- serious offence
- prima facie evidence
- grant of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 3124 of 2026
Amit Singh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Satya Priya Upadhyay
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Raj Kumar Singh, G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant
and Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State.
This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant
seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 175 of 2025 under Sections -
105, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 3(5) BNS, Police Station-Rasra, District -
Ballia, during the pendency of trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted
that applicant has not committed any offence as alleged by prosecution. It
is next submitted that due to property dispute, applicant has been roped in
the present matter. It is next submitted that applicant is not having any
previous criminal history and he has been granted interim anticipatory
bail vide order dated 01.04.2026. It is also submitted that in the event the
applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of
bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for
anticipatory bail and submitted that the allegations levelled against the
applicant are specific and serious in nature. He further submitted that
applicant along with other co-accused persons after entering in the house
made assault upon the informant and deceased through wooden stick and
in the incident, deceased sustained injuries on her head and during
NABAIL No. 3124 of 2026
2
treatment, she died due to injury. He further submitted that evidence
available on record and statements of the independent witnesses also
corroborate the prosecution case, therefore, the instant anticipatory bail
application is liable to be rejected.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the
record, this Court finds that the allegations made in the First Information
Report are specific and prima facie supported by the material collected
during investigation. The charge-sheet has already been filed against the
applicant after due investigation.
Considering the nature and gravity of the accusations, the material
available on record, and the overall facts and circumstances of the case,
this Court does not find any good ground for grant of anticipatory bail to
the applicant. In case the applicant has any grievance with regard to the
proceedings, he may avail appropriate remedy.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the present anticipatory bail application is hereby rejected.
It is made clear that observations made in the instant anticipatory bail
shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his
independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
May 6, 2026
KK Patel
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHN KANT PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…