Pappu and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 6174 of 2025

Pappu And 2 Others			.....Applicant(s)
	Versus
State of U.P. and Another			.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		:	Ehtesham Afsar Khan
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 E.A. Khan, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Manoj Gautam, 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. 145 of 2023 under Sections 147, 332, 353, 307, 427, 323, 504, 506 IPC, 7 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act and 3/4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, Police Station Cant. District Bareilly 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 applicants that as per the FIR, applicants along with 17 named accused persons and 35-40 unnamed person are said to have assaulted the police party, however, injuries received by them are simple in nature. It is further submitted that co-accused Sharif, Mohd. Fahad, Imran, Merajuddin @ Bablu Hazi and Nasir Uddin @ Guddu Hazi have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail vide orders dated 30.7.2025 and 11.7.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application Nos. 5805 of 2025 and 5514 of 2025 respectively. It is further submitted that chargesheet has been filed in the present case and applicants have no criminal history to their credit. It was also submitted that applicants undertake to co-operate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court and in case they are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey

¶10

NABAIL No. 6174 of 2025

¶11

2

¶12

all conditions of bail.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

As per the allegations in the FIR, applicants along with 17 named accused persons and 35-40 unnamed person are said to have assaulted the police party, however, injuries received by them are simple in nature. Coaccused Sharif, Mohd. Fahad, Imran, Merajuddin @ Bablu Hazi and Nasir Uddin @ Guddu Hazi have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Chargesheet has been filed in the present case and applicants have no criminal history to their 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 accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must also evaluate the entire available material against the accused carefully and the exact role of the 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 applicants 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 applicants namely Pappu, Anas and Furkan involved in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their 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 :-

¶20

(i) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence and that they would

¶21

NABAIL No. 6174 of 2025

¶22

3

¶23

appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned;

¶24

(ii) The applicants 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;

¶25

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

¶26

(iv) The applicants 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 applicants.

¶28

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶29

October 29, 2025 Madhurima

¶30

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

Pappu and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

Pappu and 2 Others 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

M/S Atharv Infrastructure Private Ltd. vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep Kumar Shukla vs State of U.P. and Another

Sonu Mali Alias Ishhak and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Virendra Singh Pahalwan vs State of U.P. and Another

Santosh Alias Kallu vs State of U.P.

Smt Eram and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another