Shamshad vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9499 of 2025

Shamshad		.....Applicant(s)
	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Rakesh Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 72

¶5

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶6

1. Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manoj Gautam, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

2. Present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 1348 of 2018, under Sections 406, 419, 420 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Khalilabad, District Sant Kabir Nagar with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶8

3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the abovementioned case. He further submits that no offence is made out against the applicant. It is also submitted that chargesheet has already been submitted in the present prosecution and the applicant has cooperated in the investigation and his statement has been recorded by the IO. It is further submitted that as per the allegation in the FIR, co-accused Kamruddin Ansari is said to have received a sum of Rs. 6,45,000/- from various persons on the false promise of securing job in the railway. It is submitted that the applicant has been assigned the role of accompanying his father (co-accused Karuddin Ansari). It is 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

¶9

NABAIL No. 9499 of 2025

¶10

2

¶11

of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶12

4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail, however, he does not dispute the factual aspect.

¶13

5. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

6. The applicant has not been arrested and he is said to have cooperated in the investigation and his statement has been recorded by the IO. Chargehseet has already been submitted. As per the allegation in the FIR, co-accused Kamruddin Ansari who is father of the applicant is said to have received a sum of Rs. 6,45,000/- from several persons of the first informant side on the false promise of securing a job in the railway. The applicant is having no criminal history.

¶15

7. 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, 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.

¶16

8. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, 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.

¶17

9. The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶18

10. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Shamshad involved in the aforesaid case crime, he 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 :-

¶19

NABAIL No. 9499 of 2025

¶20

3

¶21

(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;

¶22

(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 police officer;

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

11. 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 herein.

¶26

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶27

November 25, 2025

¶28

Abhishek

¶29

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shamshad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shamshad 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

Similar cases

Alha @ Shiv Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Virendra Singh Pahalwan vs State of U.P. and Another

Durgesh Kumar Rai @ Vikky vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul vs State of U.P.

Om Prakash Seth vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohit Mishra vs State of U.P.