SHAMIM AHMADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 9371 of 2026

Shamim Ahmad
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Akash Kumar, Ram Kumar Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Mohd. Aslam Khan, Mohd.
                                Mateen Khan

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

1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mohd. Aslam Khan, the
Learned counsel for the informant, 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.0369 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 338,
336(3), 340(2), 351(2) B.N.S., P.S.- Pakwara, 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 has contended that the primary
allegations against the applicant are of introducing the informant to the
co-accused Imran. There is no direct allegation against the applicant other
than the said allegation. The applicant has no criminal history. The
applicant had filed a writ petition before this Court being Criminal Misc.
Writ Petition No. 1356 of 2026, which was disposed of by this Court
vide the order dated 23.03.2026 with a direction that the application for
bail of the applicant would be considered and disposed of in the light of
the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar
Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC
773. The Learned counsel for the applicant states that a charge sheet has
not yet been filed and as such, apprehending his arrest he has moved the
anticipatory bail application.
4. The Learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for grant
of anticipatory bail and has contended that the applicant and the co-
                                                      NABAIL No. 9371 of 2026
                               2

accused promised employment to the informant as a District
Representative of Imran Khan, Member of the FCI Consultative
Committee, Government of India. The fake appointment letter was
handed over by the applicant himself along with the co-accused Shabir
and Fatehuddin Khan. The applicant and the other accused have taken Rs.
4,60,000/- in cash and Rs. 40,000/- has been deposited through bank
transfer in the accounts of Shabir and Fatehuddin Khan. The offence of
the applicant and the other accused is quite grave and they have cheated
the informant, who is a poor man out of Rs. 5,00,000/-.
5. Learned A.G.A. has supported the submissions made by the Learned
counsel for the informant but has not been able to point out any criminal
antecedents of the applicant.
6. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsel for the
parties and perused the material brought on the record.
7. In the opinion of the Court, paying money to secure employment shows
the dishonest and unlawful means adopted by the informant to obtain
employment. The money that has supposedly been given to the applicant
is said to have been given in cash and there is no bank transfer to the
applicant. In the opinion of the Court taking note of the entire facts and
circumstances of the case as also the fact that the applicant has no
criminal antecedents, a case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.
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 Shamim Ahmad, 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
                                                                                       NABAIL No. 9371 of 2026
                                                                  3

                                    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 24, 2026
                                    Sachin




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