Allahabad High Court

BHOJRAJversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 7 September 2026
Bench: RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA

Holding

The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting bail subject to conditions.

Summary

The applicant, Bhojraj, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the CrPC fearing arrest in a FIR alleging firing on an informant, a case with no injury. The applicant argued he was falsely implicated, had no prior conviction, and only one pending case. The informant’s counsel countered that video footage showed the applicant firing and highlighted his criminal propensity. The Court noted the applicant’s pending case involved no injury, the video evidence could be examined later, and a co-accused in a similar situation had been granted bail. Considering these factors, the Court granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions, emphasizing that the order was limited to the bail application and not a judgment on the merits.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482 when the accused is named in a FIR for alleged firing with no injury.
Whether the applicant's prior criminal history and video evidence preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
Whether the grant of bail to a co-accused in a similar circumstance influences the decision.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 109, 115(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 352, 482

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 482 CrPC
no injury case
video evidence
criminal history
bail conditions

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482
BNSS No. - 9174 of 2026

Bhojraj
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anukriti Tripathi, Vinay Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Devesh Kumar Sharma, G.A.

Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Devesh Kumar Sharma,
learned counsel for the informant and Learned A.G.A. for the State as well
as perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicant in Case Crime No.482 of 2026 under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190,
115(2), 109, 352 BNS, Police Station- Jaint, District Mathura, with a prayer
to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in
the abovementioned case.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that although the
applicant has been named in the FIR and given the role of firing upon the
informant, the case is a no injury case and the applicant has been falsely
implicated. Learned counsel has further submitted that the applicant has one
other case to his credit and the applicant is not a previous convict.

4. Learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer and has stated
that specific role of firing upon the informant has been given to the
applicant. The applicant has repeatedly fired upon the informant and it is
only by a stroke of luck that the informant escaped injury. The applicant has
a criminal history which shows his propensity to repeat the crime and he
may not be considered for grant of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the
informant has further argued that there is video footage of the applicant and
the other accused throwing brickbats, which clearly shows the participation
of the applicant in the crime in question.
NABAIL No. 9174 of 2026
2

5. Learned A.G.A. has also adopted the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the informant.

6. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the
parties.

7. The applicant has a criminal history of one other case, in which the
applicant has not been charge-sheeted till date. Although the applicant has
been named in the FIR, however, this is a case which involves no injury. The
CCTV footage/video evidence that has been collected can be appropriately
appreciated at the relevant stage before the trial court. The co-accused,
Vishambhar @ Nar Singh, who had been assigned the role of firing upon the
informant and his brother, has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482
BNSS No. 8619 of 2026. The case of the applicant stands on a similar
footing to that of the co-accused.

8. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it
appropriate to enlarge applicant on anticipatory bail.

9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is
allowed.

10. In the event of the arrest of the applicant-Bhojraj, 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;

11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
NABAIL No. 9174 of 2026
3

shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

12. 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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…