Ramsewak Yadav and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

Ramsewak Yadav and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim anticipatory bail granted to all four applicants under Section 438 Cr.P.C.: they are to surrender within 10 days and on surrender be released on a personal bond with two sureties of the like amount; conditions of cooperation in trial and non-influence of witnesses imposed; final consideration deferred with notice to respondent No. 2, counter affidavit by the A.G.A., and listing on 25.1.2026.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicants are entitled to protection under Section 438 Cr.P.C. (anticipatory bail) in respect of Complaint Case No. 8789 of 2018 under Sections 436, 323, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Lonar, district Hardoi.

Court's answer

Without entering into the merits, considering that the applicants have no criminal history, the undertaking that they will cooperate in the trial, perusal of the record, and the Supreme Court judgment in Musheer Alam (2025 SCC OnLine SC 116), it would be appropriate to grant the applicants protection under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Ratio / Principle

The applicants shall surrender before the concerned court within 10 days; on surrender they shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount; they shall cooperate in the trial, shall not influence the witnesses, and on default the trial court may proceed in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Karunesh Singh Pawar, J. — Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 1389 of 2025, decided 16 December 2025. Four applicants sought pre-arrest bail in Complaint Case No. 8789 of 2018 under Sections 436, 323, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Lonar, district Hardoi, alleging malicious prosecution, absence of injury or medico-legal examination, contradictions in prosecution witness statements, and no previous criminal antecedents; the Additional Government Advocate opposed but could not dispute these arguments. Without entering into the merits, and considering the applicants' lack of criminal history, their undertaking to cooperate in the trial, perusal of the record, and the Supreme Court judgment in Musheer Alam v. State of U.P., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 116, the Court granted interim protection under Section 438 Cr.P.C.: the applicants were directed to surrender within ten days and, on surrender, to be released on interim anticipatory bail on a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount, with conditions to cooperate in the trial and not influence witnesses; on default the trial court may proceed in accordance with law. Notice was issued to respondent No. 2, the A.G.A. was directed to file objections/counter affidavit, and the matter was listed for 25.1.2026.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1389 of 2025

Ramsewak Yadav, Mahendra, Devendra alias Jhallu and Moolchandra

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Priyanka Tiwari, Shafaq Fatima Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 15

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

1. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in complaint case No.8789 of 2018 under sections 436, 323, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Lonar, district Hardoi.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the complaint case has been filed regarding an incident which took place in 2018. It is a malicious prosecution. No one is injured. No medico legal examination of the injured has been conducted. There is contradiction in the statement of the prosecution witnesses. The applicants have no previous criminal antecedent.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial.

4. Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer made by applicant's counsel but could not dispute the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

5. Issue notice to respondent No.2.

ABAIL No. 1389 of 2025

2

6. List on 25.1.2026. In the meantime, learned A.G.A. shall file objections/counter affidavit.

7. Considering the above aspects of the matter, the fact that the applicants have no criminal history, the undertaking given on behalf of the applicants that he will cooperate in the trial, perusal of the record, as also the judgment in judgment of Supreme Court in Musheer Alam versus The State of U.P. and another 2025 SCC OnLine SC 116 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

8. In view of the above, it is provided that the applicants shall surrender before the concerned court within 10 days from today. On such surrender, the applicants shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

9. The applicants shall cooperate in the trial and he will not influence the witnesses. Any other condition which the trial court may deem fit and proper may also be imposed.

In case of default, it would be open for the trial court to proceed in accordance with law.

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

December 16, 2025 kkb/

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench