Allahabad High Court
GOLU @ RANVEERversusSTATE OF U.P THROUGH SECRETARY(HOME) U.P., LUCKNOW AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- VIVEK VARMA
Holding
The applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail.
Summary
The applicant, Golu alias Ranveer, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a session case involving alleged extortion, assault and other offences. He contended that the allegations were vague, that no substantive evidence linked him to the alleged payment of extortion money, and that he had cooperated with the investigation without violating any prior bail conditions. The State opposed the bail but could not refute the applicant's claim of lack of evidence or his compliance. The Court examined the nature of the accusations, the applicant's antecedents, and the fact that the charge‑sheet had already been filed, concluding that there was no material reason to deny bail. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and three standard conditions, and ordered the application disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 482 CrPC given the nature of the allegations and lack of substantive evidence.
- Whether the applicant's prior compliance with bail conditions and cooperation with the investigation justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the court may impose specific conditions on the anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 127(2), 308(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- false implication
- extortion
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION
U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3668 of 2026
Golu @ Ranveer
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P Through Secretary(Home) U.P.,
Lucknow And Another .....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ankur Vishwakarma, Tanzila
Parveen
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.
1. Heard counsel for the applicant and Mr. Anupam Anand,
learned Brief Holder for the State. Perused the material on record.
2. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in
Session Case No.04 of 2026 (State v. Jitendra @ Jitu Samrath
and others), arising out of Case Crime No.0020 of 2025, under
Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 127(2), 308(5) B.N.S., Police
Station- Kotwali, Orai, District- Jalaun, during the pendency of
trial.
3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case. Vague and general
allegations have been levelled against the applicant. At this stage,
there is no credible evidence to establish that any amount was
paid as extortion to the applicant and other co-accused. The
injuries received by the injured were simple in nature.
Investigation has been completed. Charge-sheet has been filed.
During investigation, the applicant was granted anticipatory bail
till submission of police report, by this Court vide order dated
4.4.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application
No.2538 of 2025 (Golu alias Ranveer vs. State of U.P.). The
NABAIL No. 3668 of 2026
2
applicant had cooperated in the investigation. The applicant has
been summoned by the concerned Court. No custodial
interrogation is required. Further, the applicant has not violated
any conditions or misused the liberty of anticipatory bail.
Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in
paragraph-26 of the bail application. The applicant has
apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. In case,
the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the
said liberty.
4. Learned Brief Holder for the State and counsel for the
informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could
not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the
record.
5. Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature
of accusations, antecedents of the applicant, and the fact that
vague and general allegations have been levelled against the
applicant. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence to
establish that any amount was paid as extortion to the applicant
and other co-accused. The injuries received by the injured were
simple in nature. Investigation has been completed and charge
sheet has been filed. During investigation, the applicant was
granted anticipatory bail till submission of police report. No
violation of the conditions or misuse of liberty of anticipatory bail
has been pointed out by the learned A.G.A. The applicant had
cooperated in the investigation; the applicant has been summoned
by the concerned court, no custodial interrogation is required;
without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion
that the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail.
6. In the event of arrest, the applicant Golu @ Ranveer, involved
in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during
pendency of trial, 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 make himself available on each date fixed
in the matter by the court concerned;
NABAIL No. 3668 of 2026
3
(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 from disclosing such facts to
the Court;
(iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous
permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be
deposited by him before the concerned court.
7. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at
liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling
the same.
8. The application stands disposed of.
April 20, 2026
Manish Kr
(Vivek Varma,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MANISH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…