Santosh Alias Kallu Vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 5714 of 2025

Santosh Alias Kallu	.....Applicant(s)
	Versus
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Mahendra Kumar, Rahul Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 72

¶5

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶6

1. This case is taken up on a mention.

¶7

2. Heard Sri Rahul Singh Rajpoot, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shiv Dutt Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No. 67 of 2018, under Sections 392, 506 IPC, P.S. Jariya, District Hamirpur with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶9

4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the abovementioned complaint case. He further submits that no offence is made out against the applicant. It is submitted that the applicant has been summoned to face trial in the said complaint case and the allegation is that he along with co-accused has looted laahi of the first informant worth Rs. 34,000/- . It is further submitted that the present complaint has been lodged simply to put pressure on the applicant to enter into a compromise on the earlier case lodged by the applicant against the complainant. It is submitted that the applicant is having criminal history, which has been explained in para 27 of the memo of application. It is further submitted that similarly placed co-accused Beernarayan has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 8.10.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 482 BNSS No. 5623 of

¶10

NABAIL No. 5714 of 2025

¶11

2

¶12

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. 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.

¶13

5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and has submitted that the applicant is a previous convict and he has been convicted for a sentence of five years under Section 307 IPC.

¶14

6. In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is on bail in appeal and Section 482 BNSS does not bar any previous convicts to move and obtain anticipatory bail.

¶15

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

¶16

8. As per allegation in the complaint, the applicant along with other coaccused is said to have looted laahi of the first informant worth Rs. 34,000/-. The applicant is said to have lodged a criminal case against the complainant prior to the lodging of the complaint. The similarly placed co-accused Beernarayan has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 8.10.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 482 BNSS No. 5623 of 2025. The applicant is having criminal history, which has been explained in para 27 of the memo of application. The applicant is a previous convict but he is on bail in appeal filed against the conviction.

¶17

9. 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, 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.

¶18

9. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding

¶19

NABAIL No. 5714 of 2025

¶20

3

¶21

anticipatory bail, submissions of the 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.

¶22

10. The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶23

11. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Santosh Alias Kallu 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, with the following conditions :-

¶24

(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;

¶25

(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;

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

12. 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 herein.

¶29

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶30

October 15, 2025 Abhishek

¶31

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Santosh Alias Kallu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Alias Kallu v. State of U.P.

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