Ramavtar vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

Ramavtar vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim anticipatory bail granted till 21.01.2026 on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence and appearance before trial Court; no inducement, threat or promise; cooperation during trial and no misuse of liberty; no departure from India without prior permission). On breach of any condition the prosecution may seek cancellation. Learned AGA directed to obtain instructions; case to be listed fresh on 21.01.2026. Final decision deferred, hence recorded as 'other' rather than a final disposition.

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant Ramavtar in Case Crime No. 362 of 2025, Police Station Farah, District Mathura, registered under Sections 121(1), 132, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 324(4) of B.N.S.

Court's answer

In the event of arrest, the applicant Ramavtar involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on interim anticipatory bail till 21.01.2026 on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

Ratio / Principle

The interim anticipatory bail is granted subject to conditions: the applicant shall not tamper with evidence and shall appear before the trial Court on dates fixed unless exempted; shall not make any direct or indirect inducement, threat or promise to dissuade persons acquainted with the facts from disclosing them; shall cooperate during trial and not misuse the liberty of bail; and shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned.

Key takeaways

In default of any of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file an appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J., Court No. 72) granted INTERIM ANTICIPATORY BAIL till 21.01.2026 to Ramavtar, applicant in Case Crime No. 362 of 2025, P.S. Farah, District Mathura, FIR lodged under Sections 121(1), 132, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 324(4) BNS (application filed u/s 482 BNSS). Invoking the Supreme Court's criteria in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 — nature and gravity of accusation, antecedents of the accused, possibility of fleeing justice, careful evaluation of available material and the exact role of the accused — the Court released the applicant on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, imposing conditions barring tampering with evidence, inducement/threat/promise, misuse of bail liberty and travel abroad without prior permission, with provision for the prosecution to seek cancellation on breach of any condition. Learned AGA instructed to obtain instructions by the next date; case listed fresh on 21.01.2026.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 10009 of 2025

Ramavtar

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Satyam Maurya, Vishal Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 72

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

Heard Shri Vishal Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri B.P. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no.362 of 2025, under Sections 121(1), 132, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 324(4) of B.N.S., Police Station Farah, District Mathura, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the maximum punishment, which can be imposed on conviction is seven years and the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that as per allegations in the first information report, the applicant is said to have assaulted the first informant, who had gone to disconnect the electricity connections of those consumers, who were defaulter in making payment of their electricity dues. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to cooperate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. submits that he has not received instructions as yet.

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme

NABAIL No. 10009 of 2025

2

Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Ramavtar involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on interim anticipatory bail till 21.01.2026 on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions :-

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned;

(ii) 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned.

In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

List this case on 21.01.2026 as fresh.

Learned AGA is directed to obtain instructions in the matter by the next date.

December 16, 2025 RKM

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad