Allahabad High Court
VIVEK KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, subject to strict conditions.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court entertained an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the BNSS filed by Vivek Kumar, who was implicated in an FIR alleging he allowed another person to sit for his D.L.Ed. examination. The applicant claimed false implication, had no prior criminal record, and had not been arrested, seeking bail to avoid apprehended arrest during trial. The State opposed the bail, but the Court referred to Supreme Court precedents outlining factors for granting anticipatory bail, such as the nature of the accusation, flight risk, and cooperation with investigation. Considering the applicant’s low flight risk, lack of arrest, and willingness to cooperate, the Court granted anticipatory bail with a personal bond and several conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or intimidation of witnesses. The order emphasized that it was limited to the bail application and did not prejudice the trial court’s eventual findings.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 482 of the BNSS in the present facts.
- Whether the applicant poses a flight risk or a threat to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses.
- Whether the nature and gravity of the accusation warrant denial of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- false implication
- flight risk
- bail conditions
- examination fraud
- U.P. Public Examinations Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 4309 of 2026
Vivek Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anuj Srivastava, Manas Tripathi, Suraj
Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 71
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Manas Tripathi, learned counsel 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. 86 of 2025, under Section 319(2) of
BNS and Section 7/13(3) of U.P. Public Examinations (Prevention of
Unfair Means), P.S.- Khuldabad, District- Prayagarj, during pendency of
the trial.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant
has been falsely implicated by the Centre Supervisor in FIR dated
27.10.2025 wherein it is alleged that some other person was giving
examination in place of the applicant. The examination is of D.L.Ed. 1st
Semester. During investigation, the accused applicant has not been
arrested. There is no criminal history. Charge sheet has been submitted.
The applicant wants to appear before the trial court but apprehending
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,
NABAIL No. 4309 of 2026
2
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. Considering that the accused applicant has not been arrested during
investigation, 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- Vivek Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime
shall appear before the trial court or the Investigating Officer, as the case
may be within 30 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 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.
NABAIL No. 4309 of 2026
3
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date
fixed, either personally or through his/their 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.
(Avnish Saxena,J.)
May 5, 2026
Krishna*
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHNA KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…