Dismissed

Sanjay Pandey and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Nov 2025NABAIL/1784/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected an application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS. The applicant was accused of offences under Sections 123, 127(3), and 140 BNS 2023. The court found the victim's statement contained clear allegations of wrongful confinement and denied the application as the investigation was in progress and no false implication was established.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sanjay Pandey and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1784 of 2025

¶3

Sanjay Pandey And 2 Others

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vyas Narayan Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ramakar Shukla

¶7

Court No. - 15

¶8

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶9

Vakalatnama filed by Shri Ramakar Shukla Advocate on behalf of the complainant is taken on record.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant.

¶11

The accused-applicant seeks anticipatory bail in Case Crime/FIR No.0346 of 2025, under Section 123, 127 (3) & 140 BNS 2023, Police Station Gauriganj, District Amethi.

¶12

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated. The victim is mentally unstable, which is evident from the rapat registered by her own father regarding her missing, which is on record as Annexure-3 to the bail application. The applicant has no criminal antecedents.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application.

¶14

Learned counsel for the complainant submits that a perusal of the statement of the victim under Section 183 BNSS shows that she has made a clear allegation of being wrongfully confined for a period of eight days and being administered medicines. No other allegation whatsoever has been made by the victim against the applicant; therefore, it cannot be said that it is a case of false implication. The victim had the opportunity to level other allegations regarding sexual

¶15

NABAIL No. 1784 of 2025

¶16

¶17

assault, which she has not made. No case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶18

Perused the record.

¶19

Anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy, to be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is satisfied that the applicant has been falsely implicated or where no material exists to justify custodial interrogation.

¶20

In the present case, the investigation is still in progress and the statement of the victim under Section 183 BNSS contains clear and specific allegations against the accused persons. It does not, prima facie, appear to be a case of false implication.

¶21

Considering the above, nature and gravity of the offence, the contents of the victim's statement under Section 183 BNSS, and the fact that the offence is punishable with imprisonment of up to ten years, no case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶22

Accordingly, the application is rejected.

¶23

November 25, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S

¶24

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sanjay Pandey and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sanjay Pandey and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Gaurav Choudhary Alias Gourav Choudhary (S.I. , PNO-194072281) vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Ram Lal Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Irrigation and Water Resources Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Sachidanand Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Handloom and Textiles Lko. and 6 Others

Vinod Sonkar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Dinesh Kumar Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Information Public Relations Deptt. Govt. Lko and 5 Others

Dr. Kamla Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy. / Prin.Secy. Ayush Lko. and Others