Allahabad High Court
SAMEERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
Since the FIR does not assign a specific role to the applicant and there is a likelihood of false implication, the court deemed it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS.
Summary
The applicant, Sameer, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, fearing arrest in a case involving mutual assault between two parties where 23 persons were named in the FIR. He argued that he was falsely implicated, had no specific role assigned, and possessed no criminal antecedents, citing that a similarly situated co‑accused had previously been granted anticipatory bail. The State opposed the bail but did not contest the applicant’s clean record. The court examined the FIR, noted the absence of dangerous injuries and the possibility of false implication, and considered the precedent of bail granted to a co‑accused. Accordingly, the court allowed the anticipatory bail, imposing standard conditions such as cooperation with police, no intimidation of witnesses, and no travel abroad without permission. The order clarified that the observations were limited to the bail application and not an opinion on the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS given the facts of the case.
- Whether the lack of a specific role in the FIR and the possibility of false implication justify granting anticipatory bail.
- Whether the court may impose conditions on the anticipatory bail to ensure cooperation and prevent witness intimidation.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 191(1), 191(2), 351(3), 352
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932 — s. 7
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- false implication
- FIR
- no criminal antecedents
- bail conditions
- assault case
- Criminal Law Amendment Act
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 8515 of 2026
Sameer
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Aslam
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant; and Learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in
Case Crime No. 184 of 2026, under Sections 191(1), 191(2), 109(1), 115(2), 351(3),
352 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932,
Police Station - Nagal, District Saharanpur, with a prayer to enlarge him on
anticipatory bail, as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the aforesaid case.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant has been falsely
implicated in the present case. The allegation is that two parties were indulging in
violence and assaulting each other using lathis, sticks, and iron rods, and also
throwing brickbats on each other from the roofs of their houses. The FIR was
registered against 23 named accused and some unknown persons by the police. No
specific role has been assigned to the applicant. The injured who are six in number
have not received any injury which may be considered to be dangerous to life.
Applicant has no criminal antecedents. He submits that similarly situated co-accused
has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in CRIMINAL MISC.
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8171 of 2026.
4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute the lack of
criminal antecedents of the applicant.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
6. The FIR has been lodged by a Sub-Inspector of Police against two parties allegedly
assaulting each other and throwing brickbats from the roofs of their houses. No
specific role has been assigned to the applicant. None of the injuries have been opined
to be dangerous to life. Taking into account the number of injured, the number of
accused nominated in the FIR, false implication cannot be ruled out. Similarly situated
co-accused has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in CRIMINAL
NABAIL No. 8515 of 2026
2
MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8171 of
2026.
7. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, as
discussed above, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.
8. The anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.
9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant- Sameer, 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;
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned shall be at
liberty to cancel the bail.
11. 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.
September 8, 2026
Sachin
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SACHIN TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…