MUSTAKIMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 9583 of 2026

Mustakim
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)                :   Shahabuddin, Zia Uddin
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.695 of 2025, under Sections 338, 336(3),

340(2), 318(4), 352, 351(2) B.N.S., P.S.- Firozabad South, District-

Firozabad, 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 contends that the applicant is merely

a marginal witness in the sale deed executed in favour of brother-in-law

(Sala) of the applicant. The Learned counsel for the applicant contends

that the applicant had filed a Writ Petition being Criminal Misc. Writ

Petition No. 29339 of 2025, which was entertained by this Court and

interim order was granted on 18.12.2025 and finally the writ petition was

not pressed by the petitioner therein with liberty to avail appropriate

remedy available under the law, after which the applicant has moved for

anticipatory bail. The applicant has no criminal antecedents.

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has contended that

the loan from the bank was taken by the brother-in-law of the applicant.
                                                     NABAIL No. 9583 of 2026
                                2


The applicant had full knowledge of the loan, despite this, he has

witnessed the sale of the property. He has submitted that there was a

larger conspiracy at work. The applicant may not be considered for grant

of anticipatory bail. Learned A.G.A. has further stated that charge-sheet

against the co-accused has already been submitted and the applicant may

be required for custodial interrogation.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsel for the

parties and perused the material brought on the record.

6. The applicant is not stated to be the beneficiary of the sale deed nor in

any manner involved with the loan that is siad to have been taken by the

brother-in-law of the applicant, Munir. Except the applicant being the

marginal witness of the sale deed in question, no direct evidence has been

pointed out against the applicant. Applicant has no criminal antecedents

and had been granted interim protection by this Court on 18.12.2025,

which continued till 29.7.2026. There is no allegation against the

applicant not cooperating with the investigation or in any manner

tampering with the evidence.


7. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case and

without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it fit to

enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.

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 Mustakim, 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:-
                                                                                          NABAIL No. 9583 of 2026
                                                                     3


                                    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;

                                    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 30, 2026
                                    Sachin




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