Shammu Pahalwan vs State of U.P.

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no.795 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 283, 332, 353, 336, 342, 436, 307, 188 of I.P.C. and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 3/4 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, Police Station Rasulpur, District Firozabad, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶11

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 similarly placed co-accused Kamar Ali has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 13.11.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 482 BNSS No.8015 of 2025 and co-accused Salman and Masooq have also been granted regular bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.11.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.29657 of 2025. It is also submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history, however, there is a case against the applicant subsequent to the present case. 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.

¶12

NABAIL No. 9371 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

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

¶15

As per first information report, 18 named and some unknown persons were involved in holding demonstrations and protest against NRC, against which, they held road blocked and also threw bricks and opened fire from their firearm. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. Coaccused Kamar Ali has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 13.11.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 482 BNSS No.8015 of 2025 and Salman and Masood have also been granted regular bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.11.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.29657 of 2025. It is also submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history, however, there is a case against the applicant subsequent to the present case.

¶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- Shammu Pahalwan 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

¶22

NABAIL No. 9371 of 2025

¶23

3

¶24

dissuade him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any 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

December 2, 2025 RKM

¶29

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶30

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

Shammu Pahalwan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shammu Pahalwan 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

Lalbabu Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Suresh @ Suresh Chandra and Another vs State of U.P.

Hooblal vs State of U.P.

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

Mewalal Maurya and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiv Kumar Chauhan and Another vs State of U.P. and Another