Allahabad High Court
DHARMIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the applicant on the ground of parity with co‑accused.
Summary
The applicant, Dharmi, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the CrPC in a case involving alleged offences under IPC sections 109, 117(2), 115(2), 352 and 351(2). He claimed that co‑accused Rohit Bhati and Jeetu @ Jitendra had already been granted anticipatory bail by another bench, and therefore he was entitled to the same relief on the ground of parity. The State opposed the application, but did not dispute the parity argument. The Court, after considering the facts, the pending trial and the submissions, held that the applicant had made out a case for anticipatory bail and granted it on the basis of parity, subject to a personal bond, two sureties and several conditions. The order also clarified that the bail order would not prejudice the trial judge’s independent assessment of the evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 CrPC on the ground of parity with co‑accused who have been granted bail.
- Whether the court may impose conditions on the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- parity
- Section 482 CrPC
- IPC offences
- conditions of bail
- Uttar Pradesh
- Noida
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 8946 of 2026
Dharmi
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vijay Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ankit Kumar Sahu, Arti Devi, G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 75 out of 76)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Vijay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri
A.K. Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
None is present on behalf of informant.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicant in Case Crime No. 99 of 2026, under Sections 109, 117(2),
115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS, Police Station Sector 142 Noida, District
Gautam Budh Nagar, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the
applicant has the apprehension of his arrest and has claimed parity with
the co-accused persons Rohit Bhati and Jeetu @ Jitendra, who have
already been granted anticipatory bail by another Bench of this Court in
Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 482 BNSS No. 7033 of
2026 vide order dated 24.7.2026. Learned counsel has further stated that
the criminal history of the applicant stands explained. Since the case of
the applicant is at par with the co-accused who have already been granted
anticipatory bail, the applicant is also entitled for the same on the ground
of parity.
5. The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by
learned AGA. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the
NABAIL No. 8946 of 2026
2
co-accused has not been disputed by him.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made
by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial,
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of
the view that the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail. The
anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed on the ground of
parity.
7. In the event of arrest of the applicant, Dharmi involved in the aforesaid
case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the
conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court
Concerned, with the conditions that:-
i. that 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 or tamper with the evidence;
iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the
court;
iv. that in case, the charge-sheet is submitted, the applicant shall not tamper with the
evidence during the trial;
v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless
personal presence is exempted;
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned
shall have the liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail of the applicant.
9. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to
the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming
his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 11, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…