Allahabad High Court
MOHAMMAD ANASversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
In the absence of cogent evidence and given the applicant’s claim of false implication, the Court held that anticipatory bail under Section 482 CrPC is warranted.
Summary
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Mohammad Anas under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case registered under several IPC sections, including 115(2), 352, 351(2), 308(5), 309(4) and 61(2). The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated in a false ransom demand allegation and had no prior criminal record. The State opposed the bail but could not refute the applicant’s submissions. The Court, after examining the record, found no cogent evidence to support the allegations and concluded that the applicant had made out a case for anticipatory bail. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to personal bond, sureties and conditions of cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and no travel abroad without permission. The order is limited to the bail application and does not prejudice the merits of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482 CrPC in the present case.
- Whether the allegations of ransom demand constitute sufficient ground to deny bail.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of criminal antecedents and cooperation justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 308(5), 309(4), 351(2), 352, 61(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- false allegations
- Indian Penal Code
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedents
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 8308 of 2026
Mohammad Anas
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudarshan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Deepak Kumar Singh, G.A., Shubham
Singh
Court No. - 68
(Sr. No.73 out of 76)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Akhil Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Sri Sudarshan Singh,
learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned
A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. Learned counsel for the
informant is not present.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicant in Case Crime No.73 of 2026 registered under Sections 115(2),
352, 351(2), 308(5), 309(4), 61(2) B.N.S. at Police Station- Puramufti,
District Prayagraj with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case. A false allegation of demanding the
ransom of Rs.2 lakhs has been made in the FIR instituted by an advocate.
The allegations are per se false. There is no evidence of the applicant having
demanded the said ransom and having snatched Rs.2,500/-. The applicant
has no criminal antecedents and apprehends his arrest in the present case.
The applicant has co-operated in the investigation and undertakes to co-
operate during the course of trial as well, failing which the State shall be at
liberty to move an appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory
bail.
NABAIL No. 8308 of 2026
2
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail
application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned
counsel for the applicant.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions
made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking
into consideration the fact that there is no cogent evidence to substantiate the
allegations levelled against the applicant, and without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie the Court is of the view that
the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the
anticipatory bail application is allowed.
7. Let the accused-applicant, Mohammad Anas, be released on anticipatory
bail in the aforesaid case crime till the conclusion of the trial on furnishing a
personal bond and two sureties each to the satisfaction of the court
concerned, subject to the conditions that he shall cooperate with the
investigation and trial, shall not tamper with the evidence or influence any
witness, shall not leave India without prior permission of the trial court, and
in case of breach of any of these conditions, the court concerned shall be at
liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail.
8. The observations made herein are confined to the disposal of the present
anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the merits of the trial.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 11, 2026
(Ravi Kant)
Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…