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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application allowed at the interim stage: Javed @ Javed Akhtar and Haji alias Mo. Rijvan, in the event of arrest, to be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, till 16.12.2025, subject to four conditions (no tampering with evidence/appearance as scheduled; no inducement, threat or promise; co-operation during trial and no misuse of liberty; no departure from India without prior permission of the Court concerned). On default of any condition, prosecution free to file an application for cancellation. Case to be put up fresh on 16.12.2025; learned AGA directed in the meantime to seek instructions in the matter.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicants Javed @ Javed Akhtar and Haji alias Mo. Rijvan should be granted anticipatory bail in respect of Case Crime no. 27 of 2025 under Sections 191(2), 351(3), 115(2), 109, 3(6) of B.N.S., Police Station Kotwali, District Varanasi. +1 more

Court's answer

Interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicants Javed @ Javed Akhtar and Haji alias Mo. Rijvan, operative in the event of arrest, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, till 16.12.2025, subject to the prescribed conditions.

Ratio / Principle

Conditions imposed on the interim anticipatory bail: (i) no tampering with evidence and appearance before the trial Court on dates fixed unless exempted; (ii) no direct or indirect inducement, threat or promise to dissuade any person acquainted with the facts from disclosing them; (iii) co-operation during trial and no misuse of the liberty of bail; (iv) no departure from India without prior permission of the Court concerned.

Key takeaways

In default of any of the imposed conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file an appropriate application for cancellation of the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Court No. 72), single member (Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.), November 20, 2025: interim anticipatory bail allowed under Section 482 BNSS to Javed @ Javed Akhtar and Haji alias Mo. Rijvan in respect of Case Crime no. 27 of 2025 under Sections 191(2), 351(3), 115(2), 109, 3(6) of B.N.S., Police Station Kotwali, District Varanasi. Counsel for the applicants contended that the applicants were not named in the F.I.R., their names having surfaced in the statement of Banshidhar @ Rinku Devvanshi; that none of the injuries to the injured was dangerous to life; and that the applicants had no criminal history; the learned A.G.A. submitted that he had not yet received instructions. Recalling the criteria laid down by the Supreme Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, the Court directed release in the event of arrest on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount till 16.12.2025, imposed standard conditions (no tampering with evidence; appearance before the trial Court when fixed; no inducement, threat or promise; co-operation during trial without misuse of liberty; no departure from India without prior permission), reserved to the prosecution liberty to seek cancellation on default of any condition, listed the matter afresh for 16.12.2025, and directed the A.G.A. to seek instructions in the meantime.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9351 of 2025

Javed @ Javed Akhtar And Another

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Raj Raghuvanshi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 72

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

Heard Sri Raj Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri S.D. Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 27 of 2025 under Section 191(2), 351(3), 115(2), 109, 3(6) of B.N.S., Police Station Kotwali, District Varanasi with the prayer that in the event of arrest, the applicants may be released on bail.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are not named in the F.I.R. and their names are surfaced in the statement of Banshidhar @ Rinku Devvanshi. It is further submitted that none of the injuries received to the injured are dangerous to life. It is also submitted that applicants have no criminal history to their credit. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes 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.

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. submits that he has not received instructions in the matter as yet.

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

NABAIL No. 9351 of 2025

2

against the accused carefully and the exact role of accused persons have also to be taken into consideration.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, let the applicants Javed @ Javed Akhtar and Haji alias Mo. Rijvan in the event of their arrest, be released on interim 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 till 16.12.2025 with the following conditions :-

(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 Court concerned;

(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;

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

(iv) The applicants 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 the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

Put up this case as fresh on 16.12.2025.

In the meantime, learned AGA is directed to seek instructions in the matter.

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

November 20, 2025 Vibha Singh

Digitally signed by :- VIBHA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad