Divyam vs State of U.P.

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no.635 of 2017, under Sections 420, 406 of I.P.C., Police Station South, District Firozabad, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶10

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 no offence alleged is made out against the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant was granted interim protection from arrest till submission of police report. It is also submitted that though the report was submitted in the year 2017 and the applicant had no knowledge from the proceeding of 2025 bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant. It is also submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history. 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.

¶11

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

¶12

NABAIL No. 9182 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

anticipatory bail and it has been submitted by him that the applicant has not appeared before the Court for a long time.

¶15

Applicant was granted interim protection from arrest till submission of police report and though the report was submitted in the year 2017 and the applicant had no knowledge from the proceeding of 2025, bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant. It is also submitted that the charge sheet in this case has already been submitted and the applicant is having no criminal history.

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶19

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

¶20

(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;

¶21

(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

¶22

NABAIL No. 9182 of 2025

¶23

3

¶24

police officer;

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

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.

¶28

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶29

November 17, 2025 RKM

¶30

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

Divyam v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

Divyam 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

Similar cases

Indu and Another vs State of U.P.

Faizan vs State of U.P.

Indraraj Singh Alias Indal Singh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sahab Lal @ Daya Saroj vs State of U.P.

Suhaib Ui Islam vs State of U.P.

Yamin vs State of U.P.