Allahabad High Court

MO ZAKARIYAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 6 May 2026
Bench: AVNISH SAXENA

Holding

The court held that anticipatory bail under Section 482 can be granted when the applicant is not arrested, poses a low flight risk, and provides adequate assurance of cooperation, subject to prescribed conditions.

Summary

The applicant, Mo Zakariya, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the CrPC in a case involving alleged offences under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 110 of the IPC arising from a property dispute and alleged assault. The applicant argued that he had not been arrested, had no prior criminal record, and feared arrest during the trial, while the State opposed the bail. The court examined the scope of anticipatory bail as laid down in the Supreme Court decisions of Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia, Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre and Sushila Aggarwal, focusing on factors such as the nature of the accusation, flight risk and willingness to cooperate. Finding the applicant’s flight risk low, no custodial interrogation needed, and the applicant’s assurance to cooperate, the court granted anticipatory bail with a personal bond and several conditions, including non‑intimidation of witnesses and presence at trial dates. The order clarified that it does not prejudice the merits of the case and that breach of conditions would lead to cancellation of bail.

Issues considered

What is the applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the CrPC in the present facts?
Whether the applicant poses a flight risk or a threat to the investigation warranting denial of bail?
Whether the applicant’s assurances and lack of prior criminal record justify granting bail subject to conditions?

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Indian Penal Code — s. 110, 115(2), 351(2), 352

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 482 CrPC
Indian Penal Code
flight risk
witness intimidation
bail conditions
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 4390 of 2026

Mo Zakariya
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jitendra Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 71
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.

1. Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar 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. 360 of 2025, under Sections 115(2),
352, 351(2) and 110 of BNS, P.S.- Naraini, District- Banda, during
pendency of the trial.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the accused
applicant and informant are related. There was property disputed between
the parties which led to lodging of FIR on 03.11.2025, after a lapse of 24
hours of incident occurred on 02.11.2025. Four persons have been
implicated including the accused applicant for entering the house and
beating the informant. The informant himself suffered injuries. During
investigation the accused applicant has not been arrested. The accused
applicant has no criminal history. The accused applicant wants to appear
before the trial court but apprehending arrest. Hence, seeks anticipatory.

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. 4390 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. This Court considering the accused applicant has not been arrested
during investigation 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- Mo Zakariya 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. 4390 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 7, 2026
Sharad/-

Digitally signed by :-
SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…