JUBAIRversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 9991 of 2026

Jubair
                                                            .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Mary Puncha (Sheeb Jose), Mohd.
                                Kalim
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

1. Heard Shri Pradeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate holding the brief of
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.364 of 2026, under Sections 318(4), 340(2),
336, 338 B.N.S., Police Station- Deoband, District-Saharanpur, with a
prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his
arrest in the abovementioned case.

3. This is a second bail application. The first bail application of the
applicant had been moved along with the co-accused Amzad, but as the
learned A.G.A. had pointed out criminal history of the applicant, which
had not been explained, the application of the applicant was permitted to
be withdrawn with the liberty of filing a fresh application after explaining
the criminal antecedents as required under Chapter XVIII Rule 18(7) of
the Rules of the Court. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended
that the applicant has clearly explained his criminal antecedents of one
case being Case Crime No.224 of 2020 under Sections 376(D), 377, 323,
504, 506 IPC, P.S. Deoband, District Saharanpur, where after
investigation a final report was submitted and the said final report has also
been accepted by the Learned A.C.J.M., Deoband. Learned counsel has
further submitted that the case of the applicant stands at par with that of
                                                      NABAIL No. 9991 of 2026
                               2


the co-accused Amzad, who has been granted anticipatory bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail
but does not dispute the fact that the case of the applicant stands on a
similar footing to that of the co-accused Amzad.

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

6. The applicant is stated to be a marginal witness in the disputed sale
deed. The applicant claims not to have received any money with regard to
the disputed transaction. The criminal history of the applicant has been
duly explained and the Court is prima facie satisfied that the applicant is
not likely to repeat any such crime in the near future.

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-Jubair, 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;
                                                                                       NABAIL No. 9991 of 2026
                                                                  3


                                    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 24, 2026
                                    A. Pandey




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