Allahabad High Court
VINAY KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The Court stayed the non‑bailable warrant for four weeks, allowed the applicant to withdraw the anticipatory bail application and seek regular bail as per Satender Kumar Antil, and disposed of the anticipatory bail petition.
Summary
Vinay Kumar filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a charge under Section 337 of the B.N.S. The Attorney General objected, arguing that the offence does not carry a punishment exceeding seven years, the charge‑sheet had already been filed and there was no apprehension of arrest, rendering the anticipatory bail petition untenable. The applicant’s counsel requested to withdraw the anticipatory bail plea and instead seek regular bail, invoking the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2021). The Attorney General raised no objection to this withdrawal. The High Court directed that, if the applicant appears before the trial court within four weeks and files a regular bail application, it must be decided in accordance with the Satender Kumar Antil precedent, without being influenced by any earlier rejection of anticipatory bail. Additionally, the Court stayed the execution of the non‑bailable warrant issued against the applicant for a period of four weeks and disposed of the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether an anticipatory bail application is maintainable when a charge‑sheet is filed and the alleged offence is not punishable with imprisonment exceeding seven years.
- Whether the applicant may withdraw the anticipatory bail petition and seek regular bail under the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Satender Kumar Antil.
- Whether a stay of the non‑bailable warrant pending the regular bail application is appropriate.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 337
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- regular bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- non‑bailable warrant
- stay of warrant
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 8518 of 2026
Vinay Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Umesh Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. At the very outset, the Learned A.G.A. has raised an objection that the
offences alleged against the applicant are not punishable with
imprisonment exceeding seven years. It is further submitted that the
charge-sheet has been filed and there is no apprehension of arrest of the
applicant, therefore, the present application seeking anticipatory bail is
not maintainable.
2. After some arguments, the Learned counsel for the applicant prays that
he may be permitted to withdraw the present application with liberty to
the applicant to approach the concerned Court and apply for regular bail,
which may be directed to be decided in accordance with the law laid
down by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central
Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2021) 10 SCC 773, and the
subsequent orders passed by the Supreme Court in the above-mentioned
case.
3. The Learned A.G.A. has no objection to the said prayer.
4. Taking into account the submissions made by the learned counsel for
the parties, it is directed that in case the applicant appears in Case Crime
No.303 of 2026, under Section 337 of the B.N.S., P.S.- Baradari, District-
Bareilly, before the Court concerned within a period of four weeks from
today and applies for bail, his bail application shall be considered and
disposed of expeditiously in accordance with law laid down by the
NABAIL No. 8518 of 2026
2
Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil (supra), without being
influenced by any observations made by the concerned Court, while
rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the applicant.
5. For a period of four weeks from today, execution of the N.B.W. issued
against the applicant shall remain stayed.
6. With the aforesaid observations/directions, this application stands
disposed of.
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
September 8, 2026
Sachin
Digitally signed by :-
SACHIN TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…