Allahabad High Court

BHEEM PRIYA BHANUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 28 September 2026
Bench: RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA

Holding

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, holding that the circumstances warranted bail under Section 482 of the CrPC.

Summary

The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Bheem Priya Bhanu under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, fearing arrest in a case involving alleged preparation of fake Inter State Transit Passes. The applicant claimed false implication, noting that the FIR named 23 accused but made no specific allegation against him, and that a co-accused, Mustfa, had been granted anticipatory bail in a similar case. The State opposed the bail but did not dispute the factual contentions. The Court observed the lack of direct evidence, the applicant’s clean record, and the precedent of granting bail to the similarly situated co-accused, and therefore ordered anticipatory bail with standard conditions. The order directed immediate release upon arrest, subject to a personal bond, surety, and compliance with conditions such as cooperation with police and no travel abroad without permission.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 482 CrPC in the absence of specific allegations against him.
Whether the applicant’s apprehension of arrest and the precedent of bail to a co-accused justify the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 482 CrPC
false implication
bail conditions
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 9851 of 2026

Bheem Priya Bhanu
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kuldeep Tripathi, Shiv Shanker Mishra
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. 383 of 2026, under Sections 318(4), 338,
336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of B.N.S., Police Station- Baghpat, District
Baghpat, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant
apprehends his arrest in the abovementioned case.

3. The Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant
has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegation is of the
STF arresting four accused, recovering a laptop, mobile phones and some
cash with the allegation that the said accused were preparing fake royalty
(ISTP- Inter State Transit Pass) which was causing revenue loss to the
State Government. The Learned counsel for the applicant has further
contended that the mobile phone of one of the accused, Talib, was
checked by the police in which allegedly one message regarding one ISTP
had allegedly been sent to the applicant about a year prior to his arrest.
The Learned counsel for the applicant has also contended that except the
said material, there is no other direct evidence against the applicant. The
Learned counsel for the applicant has lastly contended that the FIR has
been lodged against 23 accused persons. Similarly situated co-accused
Mustfa has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in NABAIL No.
8115 of 2026. The case of the applicant stands on a similar footing.
NABAIL No. 9851 of 2026
2

4. The learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail,
but does not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel
for the applicant.

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

6. The FIR has been lodged against 23 named accused persons with no
specific allegation against the applicant. Similarly situated co-accused
Mustfa has been granted anticipatory bail. The case of the applicant
stands on a similar footing. Applicant has no criminal antecedents.

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- Bheem Priya Bhanu, he
shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail
on furnishing a personal bond and surety 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;

10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
NABAIL No. 9851 of 2026
3

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 29, 2026
Junaid

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…