Shashikant vs State of U.P. and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9374 of 2025

¶3

Shashikant

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

		Versus
State of U.P. and Another			....	.Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Mohd. Naushad Kumar Srivastava	Siddiqui,	Sanjay
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.
Court No.- 73

¶6

HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Mohd. Naushad Siddiqui, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shatrughan Yadav, learned AGA for the State.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Criminal Case No. 34 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 91 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 504 and 354 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P.Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Prayagraj during pendency of the trial.

¶9

learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the applicant before this Court and his first anticipatory bail application has not been decided on merit and the same was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 2.1.2024 passed in Criminal Misc.Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 14433 of 2023.

¶10

He further submits that applicant is 'Jeth' of the informant and merely being elder brother of the husband of the informant he has been made accused in the present matter.

¶11

He further submits that during investigation applicant fully cooperated with the investigation and Investigation Officer did not propose his arrest and now charge sheet has been filed.

¶12

He further submits that after submission of charge sheet there is no

¶13

NABAIL No. 9374 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

need of custodial interrogation of the applicant.

¶16

He further argued that applicant is having apprehension, if he will appear before the court concerned then he will be sent to jail.

¶17

He further submits that even the co-accused Ravi Kant, the husband of the informant, has been released on anticipatory bail by this Court and his order has been annexed as annexure-15 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant anticipatory bail application and on facts case of applicant is on better footing than him.

¶18

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶19

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶20

Considering the fact that applicant is 'Jeth' of the informant and during investigation he was not arrested and anticipatory bail application of the husband of the informant has already been allowed and apprehension of arrest raised by applicant cannot be ruled out, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of the trial.

¶21

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail anticipatory application is allowed.

¶22

In the event of arrest of the applicant -Shashikant involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of the trial case on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court concerned with the conditions:-

¶23

(i) that 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶24

(ii) that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of

¶25

NABAIL No. 9374 of 2025

¶26

3

¶27

the court;

¶28

(iii) that the applicant shall not temper with the evidence during the trial;

¶29

(iv) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶30

(v) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶31

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶32

It is made clear that the observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶33

(Sameer Jain,J.)

¶34

November 17, 2025

¶35

SKM

¶36

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shashikant v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shashikant 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shani vs State of U.P.

Krishanpal vs State of U.P.

Parmanand Alias Cholhai vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dinesh Gautam @ Bablu and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Aasre Yadav Alias Ramashray Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajban Nishad vs State of U.P.