Allahabad High Court
SATENDRA @ BOBBYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The court held that non‑disclosure of required criminal antecedents under Rule 18(7) bars the grant of anticipatory bail, leading to dismissal of the application as withdrawn.
Summary
The applicant, Satendra @ Bobby, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The learned Additional Government Advocate highlighted that the applicant had seven prior criminal cases which were not disclosed in the affidavit, contrary to the requirement of Chapter XVIII, Rule 18(7) of the Rules of the Court. Upon being confronted, the applicant’s counsel requested permission to withdraw the present application and re‑file a fresh one with full disclosure of his criminal antecedents. The court allowed the withdrawal, directing that the application be dismissed as withdrawn and granting liberty to file a fresh application after compliance with the disclosure rule. The certified copy of the application, if any, was ordered to be returned to the applicant’s counsel.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the applicant fails to disclose his complete criminal antecedents as required by Rule 18(7) of the Rules of the Court.
- Whether the applicant may be permitted to withdraw the current anticipatory bail application and re‑file a fresh one after compliance with the disclosure requirement.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Rules of the Court — s. Chapter XVIII, Rule 18(7)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- criminal antecedents
- Rule 18(7) disclosure
- withdrawal of application
- procedural compliance
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 9577 of 2026
Satendra @ Bobby
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajesh Pathak
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. Learned A.G.A. has pointed out that the applicant has a criminal
history of seven cases, which has not been explained in the affidavit
accompanying the present anticipatory bail application, as required under
Chapter XVIII, Rule 18(7) of the Rules of the Court.
2. On being confronted with this fact, Learned counsel for the applicant
prays that he may be permitted to withdraw the present anticipatory bail
application with the liberty to file a fresh anticipatory bail application
after disclosing the complete criminal antecedents of the applicant, as
required under Chapter XVIII, Rule 18(7) of the Rules of the Court.
3. Dismissed as withdrawn with the above mentioned liberty.
4. Office is directed to return the certified copy, if any, filed along with
the bail application to the Learned counsel for the applicant.
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
September 30, 2026
A. Pandey
Digitally signed by :-
ANAND PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…