Allahabad High Court
PRINCE SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to Prince Sharma.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Prince Sharma under Section 482 of the CrPC in connection with FIR No.180 of 2026 alleging assault under IPC sections 109(1), 333, 115(2), 351(3), 352 and 324(4). The applicant argued that the injuries to the victim were simple, non‑grievous, and that he had no prior criminal record, citing a medical report and the fact that a co‑accused, Pradeep Sharma, had previously been granted anticipatory bail. The State opposed the bail but could not demonstrate any criminal antecedents. The Court observed that the applicant had no specific role in the assault, the injuries were not grievous, and the possibility of false implication could not be ruled out, and therefore found no reason to deny bail. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions, ordering his release upon arrest on furnishing a bond and surety.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 482 CrPC given the nature of the alleged offences.
- Whether the applicant's alleged participation in the assault warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the lack of grievous injuries and absence of criminal antecedents justify granting bail.
- Whether the possibility of false implication affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1), 115(2), 324(4), 333, 351(3), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- assault
- non‑grievous injuries
- criminal antecedents
- bail conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 9993 of 2026
Prince Sharma
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shiv Kumar Gupta
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.180 of 2026, under Sections 109(1), 333,
115(2), 351(3), 352 and 324(4) BNS, Police Station- Dankaur, District
Gautam Buddh Nagar, 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 FIR has been
lodged against three named accused and some unknown persons. The
allegation is of the applicant and the other accused barging into the
workshop of the informant and assaulting his nephew, Neeraj. The
injured, Neeraj, is said to have received only two visible injuries and none
of the injuries were found to be grievous in nature or dangerous to life.
4. Relying upon the supplementary report prepared by CHC, Kasna,
District, Gautam Buddh Nagar, the Learned counsel for the applicant
contends that after NCCT, head scan, X-ray chest and X-rays of left and
right shoulder, the doctor has opined that the injuries were simple in
nature. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The similarly situated
co-accused Pradeep Sharma has been granted anticipatory bail by this
Court in NABAIL No.9346 of 2026.
NABAIL No. 9993 of 2026
2
5. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not point out
any criminal antecedents of the applicant.
6. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for
the parties.
7. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. None of the injuries
have been opined to be grievous in nature or dangerous to life. The
injured is said to have received only two injuries. From the perusal of the
FIR, the mode and manner of assault, the number of accused nominated in
the FIR, in the opinion of the Court, the possibility of applicant being
falsely implicated cannot be ruled out. Similarly situated co-accused
Pradeep Sharma has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court.
8. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it
appropriate to enlarge applicant on anticipatory bail.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant
is allowed.
10. In the event of the arrest of the applicant-Prince Sharma, 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. 9993 of 2026
3
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.
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
September 24, 2026
A. Pandey
Digitally signed by :-
ANAND PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…