Allowed

Nitin v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Oct 2025NABAIL/8066/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application under Section 482 BNSS in a Baghpat case crime where the applicant's name surfaced from co-accused confessional statements and he had one prior criminal history case. Court found a case for anticipatory bail without expressing opinion on merits and allowed the application with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each, subject to standard bail conditions.

Nitin vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8066 of 2025

Nitin

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

¶7

		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Sunil Kumar Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 72

¶9

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶10

Heard Shri Sunil Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri B.P. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶11

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no.125 of 2025, under Sections 309(4), 61 of B.N.S., Police Station Doghat, District Baghpat, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶12

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the first information report has been lodged against unknown and during investigation, the name of the applicant has surfaced on the confessional statement of co-accused Dev Kanhad and Ravindra. It is also submitted that the applicant is having criminal history of one case, in which, he is on bail, which has been explained in paragraph 26 of the memo of application. 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 co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶13

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail.

¶14

The first information report has been lodged against unknown and during investigation, the name of the applicant has surfaced on the confessional statement of co-accused Dev Kanhad and Ravindra. The applicant is having criminal history of one case, in which, he is on bail.

¶15

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

¶16

NABAIL No. 8066 of 2025

¶17

¶18

evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶19

In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, 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.

¶20

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶21

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Nitin involved in the aforesaid case crime 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 :-

¶22

(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;

¶23

(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;

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

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.

¶27

October 7, 2025 RKM

¶28

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nitin v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitin v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ayush Ktheriya vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep vs State of U.P.

Ramesh Chandra Gupta vs State of U.P.

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

Hajrat Khan vs State of U.P.

Dilshad vs State of U.P. and Another