AVINASH KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

 CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482
                  BNSS No. - 9636 of 2026

Avinash Kumar And Another
                                                             .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus
State of U.P. and Another
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)             :   Awadhesh Kumar, Sanju Lata
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. 351 of 2026, under Sections 3,5(1) of U.P.
Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, Police Station-
Jiyanpur, District -Azamgarh, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory
bail as the applicants apprehend their arrest in the above-mentioned case.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicant no. 1 is an old
man aged about 65 years, the applicant no. 2 is his son and the co-accused
Sonu Kumar is son-in-law of the applicant no. 1. The applicants are
practicing Hindus by religion and the allegation against them is of trying to
induce poor men and women belonging to the Hindu religion and converting
them to Christianity. The co-accused Sonu Kumar has been granted
anticipatory bail by this Court in NABAIL No. 9617 of 2026. The applicants
have no criminal history.
4. The Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail
and has submitted that the applicants and the other accused are the primary
accused in the present case. They had promised money and other temporal
benefits to induce the weaker sections of the society to convert to
Christianity. The offense is quite grave and applicants may not be considered
for grant of anticipatory bail.
6. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsel for the
parties and perused the material brought on the record.
7. The applicants claim to be professing Hindu. The fact that the applicants
are Hindus have not been denied. The applicants have no criminal
antecedents. The applicant no. 1 is aged about 65 years and the applicant no.
                                                                                            NABAIL No. 9636 of 2026
                                                                     2

                                    2 is his son. The co-accused Sonu Kumar is the son-in-law of applicant no.
                                    1. In view of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, as appearing
                                    from the FIR, the nature and the gravity of the allegations made in the FIR,
                                    in the prima facie opinion of the Court, false implication of the applicants
                                    cannot be ruled out.

                                    8. 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.

                                    9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is
                                    allowed.
                                    10. In the event of the arrest of the applicants -Avinash Kumar and Vikki
                                    Kumar Urf Atendra Kumar, 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 permission
                                    of the Court;
                                    iv. that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;
                                    11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
                                    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.
                                    September 30, 2026
                                    Sartaj
                                                                                        (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
SARTAJ AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad