RAHULversusSTATE OF U.P.

    HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S
              482 BNSS No. - 4119 of 2026



Rahul
                                                .....Applicant(s)
                             Versus

State of U.P.
                                                   .....Opposite
                                                         Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Anurag   Yadav,     Rajeev
                                Nayan Singh, Satish Kumar
                                Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 71


                 HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.

1. Heard Sri Arun Kumar Yadav, learned counsel holding brief
appeared for the applicant and Learned AGA for the State.

2. The present anticipatory bail application under Section 482
of BNSS has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to
release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 10 of 2026,
under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 109, 191(2), 191(3) BNS,
P.S. Durgaganj, District Bhadohi during pendency of the trial.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the
accused/applicant has been falsely implicated in the FIR dated
06.02.2026. The matter pertains to cross fight on the point of
village road. In the FIR lodged by the informant 11 named and
one anonymous person were made accused. The cross fight
was on 05.02.2026 at 2:00 p.m. The accused side has also
lodged the FIR showing cross version on the same day for the
same incident, in which 16 persons were named as accused.
The accused/applicant has also suffered injuries. Both the
parties are of same village. The cross fight is the result of
altercation. The accused/applicant has no criminal history. He
                                                 NABAIL No. 4119 of 2026
                          2


wants to cooperate in the investigation but apprehending the
arrest. Hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of
the applicant.

5. The scope of ambit of anticipatory bail is encapsulated in
three insightful judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court right
from Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab reported
in (1980) 2 SCC 565, Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs.
State of Maharashtra reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694 and
Sushila Aggarwal and others Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and
another reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, wherein it is consistently
held by Hon’ble Apex Court that while granting anticipatory
bail, the Court should considering the application of the
applicant to evaluate the threat or apprehension of arrest vis-a-
vis the nature and gravity of accusation, criminal antecedent of
the accused, false or exaggerated implication, need of custodial
interrogation, willingness of the accused to cooperate in
investigation and trial and the conduct of the accused and flight
risk.

6. This Court while considering the gravity of accusation and
apprehension of arrest in the case vis-a-vis low flight risk and
assurance of the accused in cooperating with the investigation
and trial, is of considered view to grant anticipatory bail.

7. The applicant- Rahul involved in the aforesaid case crime
shall appear before the trial court or the Investigating Officer as
the case may be within thirty days from the date of this order
and shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of
Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the court concerned with following conditions :-

(i) 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 from disclosing such
facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the
                                                   NABAIL No. 4119 of 2026
                           3


evidence.

(ii) The applicant shall         not    pressurize/intimidate    the
prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the
trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii)
framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under
Section 351 of BNSS.

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that
he/she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for
evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on
each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a
ground for cancellation of bail.

9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the
purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no
way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case.
The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its
independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led
unaffected by anything said in this order.

10. The below mentioned directions shall be complied with
for expeditious disposal of trial, in case charge sheet is
submitted against accused/applicant :-

10.1 As the investigation is continuing, in the event charge
sheet is submitted and cognizance is taken, it would be the duty
of the accused/applicant to appear before the trial court or
Magistrate concerned as the case may be without waiting for
the issuance of summons, within 60 days from the date of
cognizance or on the date fixed, which ever is earlier. So that
the trial may not be delayed for non execution of summons or
processes.
                                                                                       NABAIL No. 4119 of 2026
                                                                 4


                                        10.2 The District Judge concerned shall direct each Magistrate
                                        and Special courts to maintain a register of Anticipatory Bail
                                        orders granted by this Court, wherein the details of
                                        Anticipatory Bail shall be entered. The dedicated official shall
                                        be nominated in each Special court and Magistrate court for
                                        maintaining the register.

                                        10.3 The accused/applicant shall provide a copy of the final
                                        order of anticipatory bail within 30 days, to the official
                                        concerned in whose jurisdiction the case lies and shall provide
                                        his complete contact details including the mobile number and
                                        E-mail ID (if maintained); any change in detail shall be
                                        informed by the applicant.

                                        10.4 On the submission of charge sheet and cognizance taken,
                                        the Presiding Officer shall fetch the details of the
                                        accused/applicant and the dedicated official shall inform the
                                        accused at the given detail.

                                        May 6, 2026
                                        Abhishek Sri.

                                                                                    (Avnish Saxena,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad