Allahabad High Court
AFSARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant under Section 482 CrPC.
Summary
The applicant, Afsar, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 CrPC fearing arrest in a case (Crime No.144 of 2026) involving offences under various sections of the B.N.S. He argued that he was falsely implicated as his name does not appear in the FIR or injured witnesses' statements, and only vague allegations were made by alleged eyewitnesses. The State opposed the bail but could not refute the applicant's factual contentions. The court noted that the applicant was not named in the FIR, that co‑accused had already been granted regular bail, and that false implication could not be ruled out. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the court deemed it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail with standard conditions, ordering his release upon arrest on furnishing bond and surety.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482 CrPC when the applicant is not named in the FIR and claims false implication.
- Whether the absence of the applicant's name in the FIR and witness statements suffices as a ground for anticipatory bail.
- What conditions may be imposed on anticipatory bail in such circumstances.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109(1), 115(2), 127(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 352
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- false implication
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 8921 of 2026
Afsar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jitendra Bahadur Singh
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.144 of 2026, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 352, 127(2),
109(1) of BNS, P.S. - Kakod, District- Bulandshahar, 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 contends that the applicant has been falsely
implicated in the present case. The applicant is not named in the FIR nor has his name
been mentioned by the injured in his statement. During investigation, some alleged
eye witnesses have taken the name of the applicant and a vague allegation of
participating in the crime in question has been made against the applicant.The
applicant has a criminal history of three other cases but he is not a previous convict.
4. The Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but could
not dispute the factual submissions made by 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 FIR has been lodged against nine named accused. Two persons are said to have
received injuries in the occurrence. The injured in their statements have not nominated
the applicant as one of the accused. Co-accused Yamin @ Bhagatji, Shadab @ Sadab
and Furkan @ Raseed have been granted regular bail by this Court in Criminal Misc.
Bail Application No. 23377 of 2026. Co-accused Zubair has been granted bail in
NABAIL No. 8921 of 2026
2
Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 21839 of 2026. Co-accused, Altamas @
Altamash and Adil Khan have also been granted regular bail by this Court in
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19149 of 2026. The case of the applicant stands
on a better footing from that of the co-accused. Taking note of the entire facts and
circumstances of the case, especially the fact that the applicant has not been
nominated in the FIR nor nominated in the statements of the injured witnesses, false
implication of the applicant cannot be ruled out.
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 Afsar, 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.
September 9, 2026
Sachin
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SACHIN TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…