Allahabad High Court
SHARDA GUPTA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, finding no active participation by the applicants and deeming bail appropriate.
Summary
Sharda Gupta (72) and Mohan Gupta (65), senior citizens with no criminal record, applied for anticipatory bail in a case alleging their involvement in an assault that caused injuries to six persons, including a grievous fracture. The FIR named them, but the investigating officer’s report and video evidence indicated that other individuals were the aggressors, while the applicants were merely present at the scene. The informant’s counsel argued for denial of bail, citing the applicants’ names in the FIR, whereas the applicants’ counsel emphasized their age, lack of prior offences, and absence of any active role. The court examined the facts, noted the senior‑citizen status and the lack of any specific participation, and concluded that granting bail was appropriate. Consequently, the court confirmed the interim anticipatory bail and ordered that the applicants be released immediately if arrested, subject to the same conditions as an earlier order.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicants are entitled to anticipatory bail despite being named in the FIR
- Whether the applicants had any active role in the alleged assault
- Whether the applicants' senior‑citizen status and clean record justify granting bail
Legislation cited
- Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932 — s. 7
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 191(2), 324(4), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- senior citizen
- Indian Penal Code
- Criminal Law (Amendment) Act
- assault
- injury
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 7325 of 2026
Sharda Gupta And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashutosh Kumar Tripathi, Sunil
Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s): Ajay Kumar Singh Yadav, Brij
Kumar Yadav, G.A.
Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for
the State as well as perused the record.
2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf
of the applicants in Case Crime No. 105 of 2026, under Sections
191(2), 109(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 324(4), 117(2) BNS and
Section 7 of Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1932, P.S. Sarai
Khwaja, District Jaunpur, with a prayer to enlarge them on
anticipatory bail as the applicants apprehend their arrest in the
abovementioned case.
3. The Investigating Officer, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, Inspector,
P.S. Sarai Khwaja, District Jaunpur is present in Court today.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants has contended that the
applicants are old aged persons; applicant no. 1 being 72 years of
age and applicant no. 2 being aged about 65 years. Learned
counsel for the applicants has contended that there are cross
versions and both the sides claimed injuries. Six persons from the
side of the applicant and six from the side of the informant have
received injuries. The applicants have not been given any specific
role in the assault and their implication is solely on account of the
NABAIL No. 7325 of 2026
2
fact that they are family members of the other co accused. The
applicants have no criminal antecedents.
5.Learned counsel for the informant and Learned AGA has
opposed the prayer for bail and has contended that applicants
have been specifically named in the FIR. Six persons have
received injuries, out of whom Nirmala has received a fracture in
the fore-arm, which is an injury grievous in nature. It is further
submitted that in fact it was the applicants who were aggressors
and this fact is further demonstrated from the CCTV and Video
footage that had been provided to the Investigating Officer during
investigation.
6. Learned counsel for the informant and Learned AGA could not
dispute the fact that the applicants have no criminal history.
7. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned
counsels for the parties.
8. The applicants Sharda Gupta and Mohan Gupta are stated to be
senior citizens. No specific role has been given to the applicants.
The Investigating Officer, who is present in court today, has stated
on perusal of the Case Diary and after watching the Video footage
that Vikash, Vishal, Nilesh and Ashish were indulging in violence
and were destroying the vehicles that were present on the spot.
Ashish is stated to have also in one Video footage snatched the
lathi from his father Ramdhani, and Mohan, Sharda and Panna
were seen on the spot present near their houses. From the
statement given by the Investigating Officer, it appears that Mohan
and Sharda are only seen present on the spot and there is no
active involvement of the applicants in the incident in question.
9. Taking note of the entire facts and circumstances of the case as
discussed above and also the fact that the applicants are senior
citizens having no criminal history, I deem it appropriate to confirm
the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.
10. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the
NABAIL No. 7325 of 2026
3
applicants is allowed.
11. In the event of the arrest of the applicants- Sharda Gupta and
Mohan Gupta, they shall be released forthwith in the Case Crime
No. 105 of 2026, under Sections 191(2), 109(1), 115(2), 352,
351(2), 324(4), 117(2) BNS and Section 7 of Criminal Law
(Amendment) Act, 1932, P.S. Sarai Khwaja, District Jaunpur, on
anticipatory bail on the same terms and conditions as fixed in the
earlier order dated 13.08.2026.
12. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are
exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and
are not to be considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case.
October 1, 2026
RavindraKSingh
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…