Allowed

Sanjay and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Oct 2025NABAIL/8509/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail | High Court of Judicature at Allahabad | NABAIL / Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. 8509 of 2025 | Court No. 72 | Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J. | Decided October 17, 2025 | Applicants Sanjay and Sarjeet (counsel Syed Ali Imam) vs State of U.P. (G.A.; A.G.A. B.P. Singh) | Case Crime No. 222 of 2025, P.S. Tonika City, District Ghaziabad | Sections 329(3), 31

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to applicants Sanjay and Sarjeet in Case Crime No. 222 of 2025 (P.S. Tonika City, District Ghaziabad, Sections 329(3), 316(4) B.N.S.). On arrest, they are to be released on f

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

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8509 of 2025

¶3

Versus Sanjay And Another	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Syed Ali Imam
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 72

¶5

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶6

1. Heard Sri Syed Ali Imam, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri B.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State respondents and perused the record.

¶7

2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 222 of 2025 under Sections 329(3), 316(4) B.N.S., Police Station Tonika City, District Ghaziabad with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail.

¶8

3 . It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have an apprehension that they may be arrested in the above-mentioned case. He further submits that no offence is made out against the applicants. It is further submitted that in the present case chargesheet has already been submitted against the applicants. It is further submitted that as per the allegation in the FIR the applicants are said to have executed sale deed in favour of their wives on the basis of general power of attorney executed by the first informant in the year 2024 in their favour. It is submitted that the said general power of attorney has already been cancelled by the first informant. It is also submitted that they had no knowledge of the cancellation of said general power of attorney as the same has not been communicated to them. It is also submitted that the applicants have no criminal history. It is also submitted that applicants undertake to cooperate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It is lastly submitted that in

¶9

NABAIL No. 8509 of 2025

¶10

¶11

case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and they will cooperate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶12

4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and submitted that despite the cancellation of the said general power of attorney the applicants have executed the sale deed in favour of their wives.

¶13

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

¶14

6. In the present case chargesheet has already been submitted against the applicants. The applicants have no criminal history.

¶15

7. 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.

¶16

8 . Considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the 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.

¶17

9 . The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶18

10. In the event of arrest of the applicants- Sanjay and Sarjeet 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 :-

¶19

(i) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence and that they would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the

¶20

NABAIL No. 8509 of 2025

¶21

¶22

Court concerned;

¶23

(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;

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

11. 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 herein.

¶27

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶28

October 17, 2025

¶29

Abhishek

¶30

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

Sanjay and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay and Another v. State of U.P.

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

Arvind Chaubey vs State of U.P.

Sudhir Kumar vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Kumar Tiwari vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep Alias Petha Alias Naresh vs State of U.P.

Om Prakash Puri vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shamshul vs State of U.P. and Another