Raju Verma vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7397 of 2025

Raju Verma		.....Applicant(s)
	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Brij Lal Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 72

¶5

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶6

1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant today is taken on record.

¶7

2. Heard Sri Brij Lal Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

3. Present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 546 of 2022, under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 504, 120B IPC, Police Station Beeta-2, District Gautam Buddha Nagar 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 case. He further submits that no offence is made out against the applicant. It is further submitted that similarly placed co-accused Harendra Bashista has already been granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 1.8.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 CrPC No. 5566 of 2024. It is further submitted that the applicant is having criminal history, which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit. It is also submitted that coaccused who has been granted anticipatory bail was also having criminal history. It is further submitted that the matter has been compromised outside the Court between the co-accused and the first informant. It is also submitted that chargesheet has already been submitted. It was also

¶10

NABAIL No. 7397 of 2025

¶11

2

¶12

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 co-operate 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, however, he does not dispute the factual aspect.

¶14

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

¶15

7. Similarly placed co-accused Harendra Bashista has already been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 1.8.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 CrPC No. 5566 of 2024. Matter is said to have been compromised between the parties outside the Court and the chargesheet has already been submitted and the applicant is said to have cooperated and he was served with a notice under Section 41A CrPC. The applicant is having criminal history, which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit

¶16

8. 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.

¶17

9. 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 merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶18

10. The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶19

11. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Raju Verma involved in the

¶20

NABAIL No. 7397 of 2025

¶21

3

¶22

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 :-

¶23

(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;

¶24

(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;

¶25

(iii) The applicant would cooperate 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

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.

¶28

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶29

November 26, 2025 Abhishek

¶30

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

Raju Verma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

Raju Verma 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

Udal Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Udaynarayan and 8 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep Rai and Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Manoj Kumar Thakur vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Pushpendra Gurjar vs State of U.P. and Another