Allahabad High Court
HARI SHARAN TIWARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant.
Summary
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 CrPC in a case under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant, Hari Sharan Tiwari, claimed false implication and pointed out that he was already on bail in the only base case shown against him and had no prior convictions. The State opposed the bail but could not refute the applicant’s submissions. Weighing the lack of criminal history and the fact that the applicant was already on bail, the Court deemed it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail. The Court imposed standard conditions, including cooperation with police, no intimidation of witnesses, and no travel abroad without permission, and warned that breach could lead to cancellation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 482 CrPC in view of the facts of the case.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 — s. 2(b)(i), 3(1), 3/2
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- U.P. Gangsters Act
- false implication
- bail conditions
- criminal history
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 8484 of 2026
Hari Sharan Tiwari
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chandan Kumar Chaturvedi, Rajesh
Tewari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard, Learned Counsel for the applicant, the Learned A.G.A. for the
State and perused the record.
2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicant in Case Crime No.645 of 2025, under Sections 2(b)(i), 3(1), 3/2
of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S.
- Kotwali Dehat, District- Saharanpur, with a prayer to enlarge him on
anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the above-
mentioned case.
3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case. Only single base case has been
shown in the gang chart against the applicant and in the said case, the
applicant is on bail. The applicant has not been convicted in any offence.
The applicant has no other criminal history except the single base
case shown against him in the gang chart.
4. The Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory
bail, however, has been unable to dispute the submissions made by the
Learned Counsel for the applicant.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned Counsels for
the parties.
6. Taking into consideration the fact that only single base case has been
NABAIL No. 8484 of 2026
2
shown against the applicant in which the applicant is on bail, having no
other criminal history and also the fact that applicant is not a previous
convict, I deem it fit to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.
7. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant
is allowed.
8. In the event of the arrest of the applicant Hari Sharan Tiwari, he shall
be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on
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. that 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. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission
of the Court;
iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
witness;
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
10. 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…