Vinod Bhati @ Vinod Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 5440 of 2025

Vinod Bhati @ Vinod Kumar		.....Applicant(s)
	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Rakesh Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 72

¶5

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶6

Case taken up on mention.

¶7

Heard Sri R.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 112 of 2024 under Sections 406, 420, 506, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Ecotech-I, District Gautam Budh Nagar with the prayer that in the event of arrest, the applicant may be released on bail.

¶9

It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that in the FIR, applicant has been assigned the role of introducing the vendor and the vendee. It is further submitted that co-accused Veer Singh Bhati who is one of the marginal witnesses has already been enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated 06.5.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.1538 of 2025. It is also submitted that applicant has no criminal history to his credit. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court and in case he is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶10

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶11

I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the

¶12

NABAIL No. 5440 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

parties.

¶15

Applicant has been assigned the role of introducing the vendor and the vendee and co-accused Veer Singh Bhati who is one of the marginal witnesses has already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Applicant has no criminal history to his credit.

¶16

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

¶17

In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶18

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶19

In the event of arrest of the applicant Vinod Bhati @ Vinod Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail 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 till submission of police report under section 193 (3) BNSS, with the following conditions

¶20

:-

¶21

(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;

¶22

(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;

¶23

NABAIL No. 5440 of 2025

¶24

3

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

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.

¶28

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶29

October 29, 2025 Madhurima

¶30

Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vinod Bhati @ Vinod Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Bhati @ Vinod Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Chander Patel and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Deepak Sharma Alias Deepak vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhishek vs State of U.P. and Another

Anwar vs State of U.P. and Another

Imran Ahmad and 7 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Santram vs State of U.P. and Another