Allahabad High Court
GURPREET SINGH BALversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that, on the basis of the settled principles governing anticipatory bail and the applicant’s circumstances, the case for anticipatory bail is made out and therefore the application is allowed.
Summary
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Gurpreet Singh Bal, who was implicated in a case (Crime No. 56 of 2024) involving alleged offences under IPC sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and Excise Act sections 60 and 63, relating to the transport of 750 litres of liquor with forged labels. The applicant claimed innocence, asserted that he was unaware of the alleged transportation, and highlighted his clean criminal record, offering to cooperate with the investigation. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges. Relying on the Supreme Court’s principles in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, the Court examined the nature and gravity of the accusations, the applicant’s antecedents, and the risk of fleeing or tampering with evidence. Finding that the applicant’s circumstances satisfied the criteria for anticipatory bail, the Court allowed the application with a personal bond and specific conditions. The order directed that, upon arrest, the applicant be released on bail subject to compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under CrPC Section 482 despite the serious nature of the offences alleged under the IPC and Excise Act
- Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal history and claim of non‑knowledge of the alleged crime justify the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482
- Excise Act — s. 60, 63
- Indian Penal Code — s. 419, 420, 467, 468, 471
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- IPC offences
- Excise Act
- bail conditions
- false implication
- criminal history
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 4615 of 2025
Gurpreet Singh Bal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Satendra Kumar, Sudhanshu Kumar
Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 72
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken
on record.
2. Heard Shri Satendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri
S.D. Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in
Case Crime no.56 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of
I.P.C. and Section 60 and 63 of Excise Act, Police Station Chopan,
District Sonbhadra, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant
may be released on bail.
4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that
applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is
further submitted that the applicant is said to be the owner of a vehicle,
from which, 750 liters of liquor with forged labels are said to have been
recovered. It is further submitted that the applicant was not conscious
about the alleged transportation. It is also submitted that the applicant is
having no criminal history. It was also submitted that applicant
undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when
required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in
case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty
of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all
NABAIL No. 4615 of 2025
2
conditions of bail.
5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for
anticipatory bail.
6. Applicant is said to be the owner of a vehicle from which 750 litres of
liquor with fake labels are said to have been recovered and the applicant
was not aware of this alleged transportation. It is also submitted that the
applicant is having no criminal history.
7. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v.
State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble
Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider
nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of
accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available
material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the
accused has also to be taken into consideration.
8. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding
anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, role
of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without
expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.
9. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
10. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Gurpreet Singh Bal involved
in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on his
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 not tamper with evidence and that he would appear
before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court
concerned;
(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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any
police officer;
NABAIL No. 4615 of 2025
3
(iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the
liberty of bail.
(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the
Court concerned.
11. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty
to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted
to the applicant.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
March 10, 2026
RKM
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…