Allahabad High Court
ANKIT DUBEYversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Ankit Dubey under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case alleging fraud in medical college admissions. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, had no prior criminal record, and was willing to cooperate with the investigation. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. Referring to Supreme Court precedents on anticipatory bail, the court evaluated the applicant's flight risk, potential to tamper with evidence, and the gravity of the accusations. Finding a low flight risk and the applicant's assurance of cooperation, the court granted anticipatory bail with a personal bond and several conditions, while clarifying that the order does not prejudice the trial court's merits.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 482 in view of the nature of the allegations and the applicant's claim of false implication.
- Whether the applicant poses a risk of flight, evidence tampering, or intimidation of witnesses.
- Whether the applicant's lack of criminal antecedent and willingness to cooperate justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- false implication
- flight risk
- medical college admission fraud
- bail conditions
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 4315 of 2026
Ankit Dubey
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhai Singh, Virendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 71
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Virendra Singh, 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. 223 of 2025, under Sections 319(2),
318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) BNS, P.S. Gyanpur, 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 this case during investigation.
The FIR is lodged on 20.09.2025 by Director General Health against nine
named accused for seeking admission in medical college on the basis of
false and frivolous certificates including the certificate of kin of freedom
fighter. During investigation, it is found that certain amount pertaining to
admission has been deposited by the parents in the account of accused
applicant. Further submits that the amount which was deposited with the
applicant has been transferred to the institute. There is no criminal history
of the applicant. The applicant is not involved in the present matter. There
is no aspersion cast on him during investigation. The accused applicant is
apprehending arrest though he wants to co-operate in the investigation.
Hence, seeks anticipatory bail.
4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the
NABAIL No. 4315 of 2026
2
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 considering the role of accused applicant and the material
collected by the Investigating Officer and 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- Ankit Dubey 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)
NABAIL No. 4315 of 2026
3
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/applicants 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.
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/applicants 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
NABAIL No. 4315 of 2026
4
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/applicants and the
dedicated official shall inform the accused at the given detail.
(Avnish Saxena,J.)
May 5, 2026
Sharad/-
Digitally signed by :-
SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…