Allahabad High Court

RAKESH MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 7 September 2026
Bench: RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA

Holding

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Summary

The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Rakesh Mishra under Section 482 CrPC in a case where he was named in the FIR for allegedly threatening an informant, while the principal assault charge was against his brother. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated and that his role was limited to threat, not assault. The State opposed the bail but did not dispute the factual submissions. After examining the record, the Court noted the familial connections among the accused and the possibility of false implication, and found no merit in denying bail. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the Court granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions, directing immediate release upon arrest on furnishing a bond and surety.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482 CrPC when the accused is only alleged to have threatened an informant.
Whether the possibility of false implication warrants the grant of anticipatory bail.
Whether imposing conditions such as cooperation with police and restriction on leaving India is appropriate in anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 482 CrPC
false implication
threat
bail conditions
Criminal Procedure Code

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 8540 of 2026

Rakesh Mishra
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jainendra Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Kumar Parikshit, Ritesh Kumar

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.177 of 2026, under Sections 109(1), 351(3),
115(2) B.N.S., P.S.- Sarai Akil, District- Kaushambi, 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 has submitted that the applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has not been
given the role of assault. The only allegation against the applicant is of
threatening the informant. The case of the applicant is distinguishable
from that of the co-accused Chandrakant Mishra.
4. The Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory
bail but could not dispute the factual submissions made by the Learned
counsel for the applicant.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsel for the
parties and perused the material brought on the record.
6. The applicant although named in the First Information Report has only
been given the role of threatening along with the other accused. The
specific role of assault by using a lathi has been given to the co-accused
Chandrakant Mishra. Taking note of the fact that the applicant is the
brother of the co-accused Chandrakant Mishra, co-accused Archana Devi
is the wife of Chandrakant Mishra and co-accused Kriti Mishra is the
NABAIL No. 8540 of 2026
2

daughter of Chandrakant Mishra, false implication of the applicant cannot
be ruled out. The criminal history of the applicant has been satisfactorily
explained.

7. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case and
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it fit to
enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.

8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant
is allowed.
9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant Rakesh Mishra, he shall be
released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on
furnishing a personal bond and surety each 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;
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.

(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
September 8, 2026
Sachin

Digitally signed by :-
SACHIN TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…