Mithlesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:139597

Court No. - 70

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 6551 of 2025

Applicant :- Mithlesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satya Prakash Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present anticipatory bail application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 78 of 2024, under Sections 306 I.P.C., and 4/5 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 and Section 66E of Information Technology Act, 2000 Police Station Nawabganj, District Prayagraj, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. It has further been submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedents and that no coercive process has been issued against the applicant so far. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the 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

¶9

bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the application for anticipatory bail.

¶11

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, 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.

¶12

In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding 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 merit of the case, no case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶13

The anticipatory bail application is rejected.

¶14

Order Date :- 14.8.2025

¶15

S.Ali

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mithlesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithlesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases