Allahabad High Court
KAPIL SHARMA @ SURENDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting bail subject to conditions.
Summary
Kapil Sharma (alias Surendra Kumar) was named among twelve accused in a 2021 assault case under Sections 147, 148, 149, 352, 504, 323 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. He sought anticipatory bail, claiming no prior criminal record and reliance on an interim protection order previously granted in a writ petition. The State opposed the bail but could not show any criminal antecedent and acknowledged that two co‑accused had already been granted anticipatory bail in similar proceedings. The Court, noting the applicant’s clean record, the similarity to the co‑accused, and the lack of dangerous injuries, granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions and directed the applicant to appear before the trial court. The order expressly stated that it was not an opinion on the merits of the underlying criminal case.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code given the nature of the offences and his lack of criminal antecedents.
- Whether the grant of anticipatory bail to co‑accused on similar facts mandates a similar relief for the applicant.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 352, 504
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- Indian Penal Code
- criminal antecedents
- bail conditions
- assault
- Uttar Pradesh
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 9607 of 2026
Kapil Sharma @ Surendra Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajesh Kumar
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.0534 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149,
352, 504, 323, 307 I.P.C., P.S.- Khair, District- Aligarh, 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 has
been nominated in the present case along with eleven other named
accused persons. The allegation is of assaulting Mukesh Sharma, Sanjay
Sharma and Rahul Sharma. Learned counsel for the applicant has further
contended that injured Sanjay Sharma has received two injuries. The
injured Mukesh Sharma has received one injury and the injured Rahul
Sharma has received three injuries. None of the injuries have been opined
to be dangerous to life. Learned counsel for the applicant has further
argued that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he had been
granted interim protection from arrest in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.
11491 of 2021. The applicant had challenged the proceedings in
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 21817 of 2024, which had been dismissed
by this Court with certain directions. Learned counsel for the applicant
contends that as the interim order had been operating in favour of the
applicant in the writ petition which came to be finally dismissed by a
NABAIL No. 9607 of 2026
2
Division Bench of this Court on 25.03.2026, it is thereafter that the
applicant has approached the Court for seeking anticipatory bail. The co-
accused Vipin Kumar @ Vipin Sharma and Ompal Sharma @ Om
Prakash have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in NABAIL
Nos. 8136 of 2026 and 9417 of 2026 respectively. The case of the
applicant stands on a similar footing to that of the co-accused.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, however, could not
dispute the fact that the case of the applicant stands on a similar footing to
that of the co-accused Vipin Kumar @ Vipin Sharma and Ompal Sharma
@ Om Prakash. No criminal antecedents have been pointed out by the
Learned A.G.A.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for
the parties.
6. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case, the lack
of criminal antecedents of the applicant as also the fact that similarly
situated co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail and without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it fit to enlarge
the applicant on anticipatory bail.
7. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant
is allowed.
8. The applicant - Kapil Sharma @ Surendra Kumar shall appear
before the trial Court within four weeks from today and shall be released
on bail on filing his personal bond and surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-
i. The applicant shall remain present before the trial Court on each date
fixed unless exempted by the trial Court;
ii. 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. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of
NABAIL No. 9607 of 2026
3
the Court;
iv. The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
10. 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…