MOHD IQBAL AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 9596 of 2026

Mohd Iqbal And Another
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)           :   Mazhar Ullah, Md Faiz Siddiqui
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)      :   G.A.

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

1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicants, 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
applicants in Case Crime No.69 of 2026, under Sections 191(2), 132,
121(1), 221, 61(2), 109(1) of B.N.S., P.S. - Pipri, District- Kaushambi,
with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail as the applicants
apprehend their arrest in the above-mentioned case.
3. The Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicants
are not named in the FIR. The FIR was lodged against five named
accused persons and about twelve unknown persons. During the
investigation, accused Shivam Singh and Afgan, on the basis of statement
of witnesses recorded, were taken out of the investigation and their
involvement was found to be false. Learned counsel has submitted that
the names of the applicants have crept in on viewing the CCTV footage
and on identification by some persons whose names have not been
specifically disclosed. Learned counsel for the applicants has also
contended that no specific role has been assigned to the applicants. None
of the injuries received by the two injured have been opined to be
dangerous to life or grievous in nature. The applicant No. 1 has a criminal
history of one case in which he has been acquitted and the applicant No. 2
has a criminal history of one case in which he is on bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail
but does not dispute the explanation given by the applicants regarding
                                                     NABAIL No. 9596 of 2026
                               2

their criminal antecedents.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsel for the
parties and perused the material brought on the record.
6. The applicants are not named in the FIR. The names of the applicants
have surfaced when the CCTV footage was shown by the police to some
persons whose names have not been disclosed in the case diary and no
specific role appears to have been disclosed on perusal of the CCTV
footage. Learned counsel for the applicants relying upon paragraph No.20
of the affidavit has stated that they were passersby who had stopped at the
petrol pump in question for refueling when the CCTV footage captured
his presence. Learned counsel has further submitted that the applicants are
neither the employee nor the owner of the petrol pump in question. The
vehicles that were supposedly carrying illegally excavated sand do not
belong to the applicants. Taking note of the submissions made by the
Learned counsels for the parties and also the fact that no specific role or
act has been attributed to the applicants in the CCTV footage, prima facie
a case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.

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 applicants on anticipatory bail.

8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants
is allowed.
9. In the event of the arrest of the applicants Mohammad Iqbal and
Haseen Ahmad, they 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 applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a
police officer as and when required;
ii. that the applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or
to any police officer;
iii. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous
                                                                                       NABAIL No. 9596 of 2026
                                                                  3

                                    permission of the Court;
                                    iv. that the applicants 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