Allahabad High Court
PUSHPENDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, Pushpendra Kumar, subject to conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 CrPC filed by Pushpendra Kumar, who feared arrest in a case involving alleged manipulation of electronic weighing machines and misappropriation of sugarcane. The applicant was not named in the FIR, though co‑accused Bittu Singh and Vishal Kumar had already been granted anticipatory bail in related matters. The counsel highlighted the applicant’s minimal criminal history and the similarity of his situation to the co‑accused. The State opposed the bail but could not dispute the factual parallels. After evaluating the facts, the court deemed it appropriate to enlarge anticipatory bail, imposing standard conditions and reserving the right to cancel if breached.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to a person not named in the FIR but implicated in the alleged offence.
- Whether the grant of anticipatory bail to co‑accused influences the decision for the applicant.
- Whether the applicant’s prior criminal record warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- Indian Penal Code
- sugarcane weighing fraud
- bail conditions
- co‑accused
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 8773 of 2026
Pushpendra Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Dwivedi, Krishna Dutt Tiwari
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. 180 of 2026, under Sections 318(4), 338,
336(3), 340(2), 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Civil Lines, District
Moradabad, 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 is not named
in the FIR. The co-accused Bittu Singh, who is said to be the transporter, has
been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in NABAIL No.4476 of 2026.
The allegations are against the nominated accused of manipulating the
electronic weighing machine and misappropriating sugarcane. Learned
counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant has a criminal
history of one case, in which final report has been submitted.
4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, however could not dispute
the fact that the case of the applicant stands on a similar footing to that of the
co-accused Bittu Singh.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the
parties.
6. The applicant is not named in the FIR. Co-accused Bittu Singh has been
granted anticipatory bail by this Court. The co-accused Bittu Singh is stated
to be the transporter who used to transport sugarcane, the weight of which
NABAIL No. 8773 of 2026
2
had been interpolated. The allegation is that for the financial year 2025-26,
nearly 26 quintals has been the loss caused due to wrongly showing the
weight of laden and unladen vehicles. The applicant is said to be the person,
who had been engaged for the purpose of weighing the vehicles in question.
The transporter Bittu Singh has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court.
The co-accused Vishal Kumar has been granted anticipatory bail by this
Court in NABAIL No. 8730 of 2026. The criminal history of the applicant
has been satisfactorily explained.
7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it
appropriate to enlarge 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-Pushpendra Kumar, 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;
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
Sartaj
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SARTAJ AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…