Allahabad High Court

MONU @ MOHIT KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 29 September 2026
Bench: RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA

Holding

The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting bail to the applicant.

Summary

The applicant, Monu @ Mohit Kumar, filed an anticipatory bail application under Sections 115(2) and 109(1) of the B.N.S., 2023, fearing arrest in a case where he is allegedly implicated. The FIR, lodged two days after the incident, does not name the applicant, and a video presented by the prosecution does not show him firing a weapon. The applicant's counsel argued that he was falsely implicated and has no prior conviction, while the State contended that the video establishes his presence at the scene but admits it does not prove he fired. The court examined the lack of direct evidence linking the applicant to the alleged firing and noted that no injury occurred and the applicant’s criminal history was minimal. Considering these facts, the court deemed it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail with standard conditions. The bail order directs that the applicant be released upon arrest, subject to a personal bond and compliance with the stipulated conditions.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the applicant is not named in the FIR and there is no direct evidence of his participation in the alleged offence
Whether the presence of the applicant in a video, without showing him committing the alleged act, suffices to deny bail
Whether the applicant's prior criminal history affects the grant of anticipatory bail under Sections 115(2) and 109(1) of the B.N.S., 2023

Legislation cited

B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
section 115(2)
section 109(1)
B.N.S. 2023
false implication
video evidence
FIR
bail conditions

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S
482 BNSS No. - 9601 of 2026

Monu @ Mohit Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rishabh Agrawal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant and Learned A.G.A.
for the State as well as perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on
behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.0503 of 2026, under
Sections 115(2) & 109(1) of B.N.S., 2023, P.S. Jagdishpura,
District Agra, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail
as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the abovementioned
case.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the
applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is
not named in the FIR. The applicant has not been assigned the
specific role of firing upon the informant. The applicant has a
criminal history of one other case but he is not a previous
convict.

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has
contended that there is a video of the incident and the
applicant's presence on the spot is established from the said
video. He, however, does not dispute the fact that there is no
material to indicate that it was the applicant who had fired. He
has stated that in the statement of witnesses the specific role of
firing has been assigned to co-accused Vinay Yadav.
NABAIL No. 9601 of 2026
2

5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned
counsels for the parties.

6. The FIR has been lodged after two days of the occurrence.
The applicant has not been named in the FIR. No one is said to
have received any injury in the occurrence. The video that is
being referred to by Learned A.G.A. does not show the
applicant wielding firearm or firing upon the informant, as per
the instructions of Learned A.G.A. The criminal history of the
applicant has been satisfactorily explained.

7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case,
I deem it appropriate to enlarge 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-Monu @ Mohit
Kumar, he shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case
crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and
surety 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;

10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court
concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
NABAIL No. 9601 of 2026
3

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.

September 30, 2026
A. Pandey

(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
ANAND PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…