Allahabad High Court
CHIRAGversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The court held that a prima facie case for anticipatory bail exists and allowed the application.
Summary
The applicant, Chirag, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the CrPC in connection with a case under Sections 191(2), 191(3) and 109(1) of the B.N.S., 2023, alleging that a FIR was falsely lodged by a 13‑year‑old boy under pressure from villagers. The applicant’s counsel argued that the injuries reported were not grievous and that the victim’s father had submitted an affidavit denying the incident. The State opposed bail but did not contest the father’s affidavit. The court noted that Section 109(1) is non‑compoundable, so the affidavit could not be relied upon at this stage, but found the FIR version implausible and the injuries non‑grievous. Considering the facts, the court held that a prima facie case for anticipatory bail existed and granted bail with standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case involving offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3) and 109(1) of the B.N.S., 2023.
- Whether an affidavit by the victim’s father can be taken into account when the offence is non‑compoundable.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute a prima facie case justifying anticipatory bail.
- Whether the applicant’s prior criminal history affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109(1), 191(2), 191(3)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- non‑compoundable offence
- false FIR
- Section 109 B.N.S.
- Section 191 B.N.S.
- bail conditions
- witness intimidation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 8470 of 2026
Chirag
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pankaj Kumar Shukla, Ritesh Kumar
Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit, filed today in Court, is taken on record.
2. Heard Learned Counsel for the applicant; and Learned A.G.A. for the
State.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicant in Case Crime No. 203 of 2026, under Sections 191(2), 191(3)
and 109(1) of the B.N.S., 2023, Police Station – Raya, District Mathura,
with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, as the applicant
apprehends his arrest in the aforesaid case.
4. The Learned Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case. The First Information Report
(FIR) has been lodged against the applicant and four to five unknown
persons regarding the applicant's car trying to run over the informant and
then also firing in the air. The Learned Counsel for the applicant contends
that the informant is a thirteen year old boy and there is no previous
enmity with the applicant. Under the pressure of some villagers, who
were antagonistic towards the applicant, the little boy was made to lodge
this false FIR. Later, the father of the injured informant has given an
affidavit denying any such incident. Learned Counsel has further
submitted that even otherwise the injuries that have been noted in the
medical examination report of the injured, do not show any crush injuries
or injuries which may have been caused in a collision from an SUV. None
of the injuries were opined to be grievous in nature or dangerous to life.
NABAIL No. 8470 of 2026
2
Applicant has a criminal history of four cases but he is not a previous
convict.
5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute
the fact that the father of the injured has filed an affidavit in favour of the
applicant.
6. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned Counsel for the
parties.
7. A case under Section 109(1) of the B.N.S. is a non-compoundable
offence. Therefore, the effect of the affidavit, at the present stage, cannot
be taken into account. It however is apparent that a thirteen year old boy
is said to have lodged an F.I.R. against the applicant and the other accused
knowingly trying to run over the victim and then also firing shots in the
air, without there being any previous demonstrated enmity. The version
set up in the FIR does not appear to be a version which is believable in the
facts and circumstances of the present case. The injuries sustained by the
injured are also not stated to be grievous in nature or dangerous to life.
8. Taking into account the entire facts and circumstances of the case,
prima facie a case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.
9. The anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.
10. In the event of the arrest of the applicant- Chirag, involved in the
aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail, on his
furnishing a personal bond and surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court
concerned, with the following conditions:-
i. The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police
officer as and when required;
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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police
officer;
iii. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of
the Court;
iv. The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;
NABAIL No. 8470 of 2026
3
11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
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.
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
September 14, 2026
Kushal
Digitally signed by :-
KUSHAL AGRAWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…