Mohd. Asif v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Apr 2025NABAIL/2300/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail refused; Section 482 BNSS application disposed; Section 35 BNSS arrest safeguards for offences punishable up to seven years; no arrest without IO compliance with Section 35 BNSS; Case Crime No. 01 of 2025; Section 3 R.P. (U.P.) Act; P.S. R.P.F. Post Kanpur Central; District Kanpur Nagar; Union of India impleaded as opposite party no.2; counsel Ashok Kumar Pandey, Rajesh Tripathi, AGA Neeraj Kumar Sharma; Hon'ble Vivek Varma, J.; Allahabad High Court; 2025:AHC:51999; dated 9.4.2025.

What did the court decide?

For offences punishable up to seven years, an accused cannot be arrested until and unless the Investigating Officer complies with the mandate of Section 35 B.N.S.S. ¶¶13

Mohd. Asif vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:51999

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2300 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Asif Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Counsel for the applicant is permitted to implead the Union of India through Senior Security Officer, N.C.R., Allahabad as opposite party no.2 in the memo of application.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Tripathi, counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.01 of 2025, under Section 3 of R.P. (U.P.) Act, Police Station R.P.F. Post Kanpur Central, District- Kanpur Nagar.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶10

Per contra, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submit that the investigation is pending in the matter. A prima facie case is made out. Referring to the provisions of Section 35 of B.N.S.S. it is submitted that since offences levelled in the first information report are punishable up to seven years only, the applicant cannot be arrested. An apprehension of arrest shown in the anticipatory bail is not genuine. Thus prayer has been made for rejection of anticipatory bail.

¶11

I have considered the rival submissions raised by learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

In the matter, it is evident from the record that anticipatory bail

¶13

has been moved for the offences in which the maximum punishment is of seven years. There is a specific provision under Section 35 of B.N.S.S. on point of arrest of the accused relating to the offences punishable up to seven years. Until and unless the mandate given in Section 35 of B.N.S.S. is complied by the Investigating Officer, accused of such offences cannot be arrested.

¶14

Thus keeping in view of the statutory provisions on point of arrest of the accused, the Court is of the opinion that there is no need of anticipatory bail as the applicant cannot be arrested without complying with the provision given in Section 35 of B.N.S.S. Specific provisions under Section 35 of B.N.S.S. have been provided giving protection to the accused persons from arrest in offences punishable up to seven years punishment. Thus, prayer made in the present application is refused.

¶15

With the above observations, the present application stands disposed of.

¶16

Order Date :- 9.4.2025 Manish Kr

¶17

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

Mohd. Asif v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Asif v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Uma Shankar Shukla vs State of U.P. and Another

Mehndi Hasan vs State of U.P.

Ritu Divedi vs State of U.P.

Smt. Akbari Begum vs State of U.P.

Harsh Singh Alias Billa vs State of U.P.

Deepak Kumar vs State of U.P.