Sudhir Kumar Vs State of U.P.

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 21 of 2025 under Sections 147, 420, 467, 468, 471, 447, 448, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad with the prayer that in the event of arrest, the applicant may be released on bail.

¶12

It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that there are allegations in the FIR that applicant is said to have extended help to co-accused Purushottam to encroach the lawfully allotted plot in favour of the first informant. It is further submitted that the said allotment to the first informant has also not been found valid. It is further submitted that applicant is having criminal history of one case which has been explained in paragraph 16 of the memo of application. It is also submitted that there are general allegations against the applicant. 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 and in case he is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶13

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

¶14

NABAIL No. 8421 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

anticipatory bail.

¶17

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

¶18

As per the FIR, applicant is said to have extended help to co-accused Purushottam to encroach upon a land allotted to the first informant. The said allotment to the first informant has also not been found valid. Applicant is having criminal history of one case which has been explained in paragraph 16 of the memo of application.

¶19

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 the accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate the entire available material against the accused carefully and the exact role of accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶20

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 applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶21

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶22

In the event of arrest of the applicant Sudhir Kumar 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 :-

¶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

¶25

NABAIL No. 8421 of 2025

¶26

3

¶27

to dissuade him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

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.

¶31

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶32

October 15, 2025

¶33

Madhurima

¶34

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

Sudhir Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhir Kumar 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