Allahabad High Court
SUHAILversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The court held that, on a prima facie basis, the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 CrPC.
Summary
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 of the CrPC by Suhail, the husband of a woman who alleged he attempted to strangle her. The FIR, lodged by the victim's brother‑in‑law, charged Suhail and a co‑accused under IPC Sections 109, 115(2), 351(3) and 85, alleging assault. The applicant argued he had no criminal record, the injuries were not life‑threatening, and he needed to care for his ailing mother, while the State contended that as the husband he bore primary responsibility for the victim’s safety. The court noted the matrimonial dispute, the lack of serious injury, and the absence of antecedents, and in a prima facie view found the criteria for anticipatory bail satisfied. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions and clarified that this order does not prejudice the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 CrPC despite being the husband of the alleged victim.
- Whether the nature of the alleged offences and the lack of life‑threatening injuries justify bail.
- Whether the matrimonial dispute and the applicant's personal circumstances affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 351(3), 85
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- domestic violence
- murder attempt
- bail conditions
- matrimonial dispute
- Indian Penal Code
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 9593 of 2026
Suhail
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Javed Alam
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.288 of 2026, under Sections 109, 115(2),
351(3) and 85 BNS, Police Station- Hapur Nagar, District Hapur, 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 is
the husband of the victim and that the FIR has been lodged by his brother-
in-law. General allegations have been made in the FIR that the applicant
and the co-accused, Ehtesham, tried to strangulate the victim using a
'dupatta' and also assaulted her.
4. Learned counsel has contended that the father of the applicant is
already in jail. The mother of the applicant is quite ill, and there is no one
to take care of her, as she has also been arrayed as an accused in the
present case. Learned counsel has further submitted that none of the
injuries noted in the medical examination of the injured have been opined
to be dangerous to life. The applicant has no criminal antecedents.
5. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and has stated that the
applicant, being the husband of the victim, had the primary responsibility
of taking care of her, and he is the one who tried to kill the victim.
NABAIL No. 9593 of 2026
2
Therefore, he may not be considered for grant of anticipatory bail.
6. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the
parties.
7. The applicant is stated to be the husband of the injured having no
criminal antecedents. None of the injuries has been opined to be
dangerous to life. There appears to be a matrimonial dispute between the
parties. The FIR has been lodged one day after the occurrence.
8. Taking note of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, in the
prima facie opinion of the Court, a case for grant of anticipatory bail is
made out. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I
deem it fit to enlarge the 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 Suhail, 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
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. 9593 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.
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
September 16, 2026
S.A.
Digitally signed by :-
SALMAN AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…