Naseema Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:60466

Court No. - 69

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3021 of 2025

Applicant :- Naseema Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

At the outset, counsel for the applicant prays for and is permitted to make necessary correction in the prayer clause of the application.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.48 of 2025, under Section 306, 115(2), 351(2), 352 B.N.S., Police Station- Sector 20, NOIDA, District- Gautam Budh 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 her arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits 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 has been moved for the offences in which the maximum

¶13

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 :- 22.4.2025 Manish Kr

¶17

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

Naseema v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naseema 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