Allahabad High Court
OMPAL SHARMA @ OM PRAKASHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting bail to the applicant under Section 482 CrPC.
Summary
The applicant, Ompal Sharma, was named among twelve accused in a case involving assault causing non‑life‑threatening injuries to three victims. He had no prior criminal record and had earlier obtained interim protection from arrest in a writ petition, which was later dismissed. The applicant sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the CrPC, arguing that a co‑accused in a similar situation had already been granted bail. The State opposed the bail but did not dispute the applicant’s clean record or the similarity to the co‑accused. Considering the lack of antecedents, the similarity to the co‑accused’s bail, and the circumstances of the alleged offences, the Court granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 482 CrPC given the nature of the alleged offences and his lack of criminal antecedents.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 352, 504
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- Indian Penal Code
- assault
- bail conditions
- High Court of Allahabad
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 9417 of 2026
Ompal Sharma @ Om Prakash
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jai Shankar Pandey
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.0534 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 352, 504, 323, 307 I.P.C.,
P.S.- Khair, District- Aligarh, 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 applicant has been
nominated in the present case along with eleven other named accused persons. The
allegation is of assaulting Mukesh Sharma, Sanjay Sharma and Rahul Sharma.
Learned counsel for the applicant has further contended that injured Sanjay Sharma
has received two injuries. The injured Mukesh Sharma has received one injury and the
injured Rahul Sharma has received three injuries. None of the injuries have been
opined to be dangerous to life. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued
that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he had been granted interim
protection from arrest in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 11491 of 2021. The
applicant had challenged the proceedings in APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 21817 of
2024, which had been dismissed by this Court with certain directions. Learned counsel
for the applicant contends that as the interim order had been operating in favour of the
applicant in the writ petition which came to be finally dismissed by a Division Bench
of this Court on 25.03.2026, it is thereafter that the applicant has approached the Court
for seeking anticipatory bail. The co-accused Vipin Kumar @ Vipin Sharma has been
granted anticipatory bail by this Court in NABAIL No. 8136 of 2026. The case of the
applicant stands on a similar footing to that of the co-accused.
4. Learned A.G.A. 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 Vipin Kumar @ Vipin Sharma. No criminal antecedents have been pointed
NABAIL No. 9417 of 2026
2
out by the Learned A.G.A.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the parties.
6. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case, the lack of criminal
antecedents of the applicant as also the fact that similarly situated co-accused has been
granted anticipatory bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
I deem it fit to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.
7. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.
8. The applicant - Ompal Sharma @ Om Prakash shall appear before the trial Court
within four weeks from today and shall be released on bail on filing his personal bond
and surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the
following conditions:-
i. The applicant shall remain present before the trial Court on each date fixed unless
exempted by the trial Court;
ii. 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. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;
iv. The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned shall be at
liberty to cancel the bail.
10. 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 11, 2026
Sartaj
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SARTAJ AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…