Arun Kumar vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

Arun Kumar vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim anticipatory bail till 10.12.2025 granted to applicant Arun Kumar on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to stated conditions; final decision deferred — case to be listed fresh on 10.12.2025 with learned AGA directed to obtain instructions by the next date.

Issue for consideration

Whether applicant Arun Kumar, implicated in Case Crime no. 353 of 2024 (Police Station Kithaur, District Meerut) under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 351(3), 115(2), 338, 339, 341, 61(2) of B.N.S. though not named in the FIR, should be granted anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

In the event of arrest, applicant Arun Kumar shall be released on interim anticipatory bail till 10.12.2025 on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

Ratio / Principle

Interim anticipatory bail is subject to four conditions: (i) applicant shall not tamper with evidence and shall appear before the trial Court on dates fixed unless exempted; (ii) applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to dissuade disclosure of facts; (iii) applicant shall co-operate during trial and not misuse the liberty of bail; (iv) applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned.

Key takeaways

On default of any of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file an appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.ratio¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.), judgment dated November 7, 2025, in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. 8847 of 2025 (alias NABAIL No. 8847 of 2025), Arun Kumar v. State of U.P.: interim anticipatory bail granted till 10.12.2025 in respect of Case Crime no. 353 of 2024, Police Station Kithaur, District Meerut, under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 351(3), 115(2), 338, 339, 341, 61(2) of B.N.S. Counsel submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR and his name surfaced only in the first informant's statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS; the learned AGA (Shri B.P. Maurya) reported having no instructions on successive dates and opposed the application generally. Relying on the factors articulated in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 (nature and gravity of accusation, antecedents, possibility of fleeing justice, careful evaluation of material, and exact role of the accused), the Court ordered release on interim anticipatory bail till 10.12.2025 on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, conditioned on: no tampering with evidence and attendance before the trial Court unless exempted; no inducement, threat or promise to dissuade disclosure; co-operation during trial without misuse of liberty; and no departure from India without prior permission. On default of any condition the prosecution may move for cancellation. Matter listed fresh for 10.12.2025; AGA directed to obtain instructions by the next date. Disposition recorded as 'other' as the grant is interim and the final adjudication remains open.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8847 of 2025

Arun Kumar

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bed Prakash Rai Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 72

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

Heard Shri Bed Prakash Rai, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri B.P. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no.353 of 2024, under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 351(3), 115(2), 338, 339, 341, 61(2) of B.N.S., Police Station Kithaur, District Meerut, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

At the very outset, learned AGA submits that he has not received instructions in the matter as yet.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant submits that on the last date also, learned AGA had no instructions. It is further submitted that the applicant is not named in the first information report and his name has surfaced in the statement of the first informant recorded under Section 180 BNSS. 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.

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

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

NABAIL No. 8847 of 2025

2

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.

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Arun Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on interim anticipatory bail till 10.12.2025 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 :-

(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;

(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;

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

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

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.

List this case on 10.12.2025 as fresh.

Learned AGA is directed to obtain instructions in the matter by the next date.

November 7, 2025 RKM

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

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