Rajeev Alias Raju and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8940 of 2025

Rajeev Alias Raju And 4 Others

	.....Applicant(s)
	Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Mahendra Pal Singh Gaur, Suman Srivastava : Ajay Kumar Kashyap, G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 72

¶6

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶7

Heard Ms. Suman Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri AK Kashyap, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri S.D. Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 481 of 2025 under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109, 115(2), 309(4), 333, 352, 351(2) of B.N.S., Police Station Aonla, District Bareilly with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail.

¶9

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that there is a cross case to the present case and no specific role has been assigned to any of the applicants and except one injury of fracture of forearm, none of the injuries of the injured Pawan Kumar is grievous in nature. She further submits that applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 04.11.2025 and he is continuing on the same. It was also submitted that applicants undertake to co-operate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court and in case they are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶10

On the other hand, learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that injuries suffered by one of the injured Pawan Kumar are grievous in nature.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. also opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶12

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

¶13

NABAIL No. 8940 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

parties.

¶16

No specific role has been assigned to any of the applicants and as per the FIR, applicants along with other co-accused persons are said to have assaulted the first informant side as a result of which, one person is said to have receive various injuries on his person and one injured Pawan Kumar has suffered fracture of his left forearm which is grievous in nature but not dangerous to life.

¶17

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

¶18

Considering all attending facts and circumstances of the case, settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants and without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶19

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶20

In the event of arrest of applicants namely Rajeev @ Raju, Kuldeep, Noni, Pratap Singh and Himanshu involved in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on the same terms and conditions as directed by this Court vide order dated 04.11.2025.

¶21

In default of any of the conditions imposed vide order dated 04.11.2025, prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶22

December 16, 2025

¶23

Madhurima

¶24

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶25

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

Rajeev Alias Raju and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeev Alias Raju and 4 Others 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

Lallu Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Najeem vs State of U.P.

Guljar Anwar vs State of U.P.

Shiv Dayal vs State of U.P.

Sunny Chauhan Alias Sunny Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Kanchan Singh vs State of U.P.