Dismissed

Shyam Surat Patel and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Dec 2025NABAIL/9864/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants sought anticipatory bail in a 2025 Prayagraj case concerning the death of a man after a mob assault. The court, guided by Sushila Aggarwal principles and considering the gravity of the accusations and injuries on the deceased, refused the prayer and rejected the application.

What the court decided

AI extract

Shyam Surat Patel and Another vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9864 of 2025

¶3

Shyam Surat Patel And Another

¶4

.....Applicant(s) Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anand Kumar, Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 71

¶6

HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

This application has been moved on behalf of the applicants. 1. Shyam Surat Patel and 2. Ashish Kumar Patel seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 112 of 2025, under Sections 3(5), 105, 191(2), 351(3) BNS, Police Station- Bahariya, District- Prayagraj.

¶9

The present accused applicants along with some other named accused and other unknown persons was alleged to attack upon the deceased and all the persons named/ unnamed in the FIR also participated in the commission of crime and on account of the said attack and particularly the strangulation made by the accused persons injured Awanish Kumar Patel died. The incident was seen by Shiv Pratap who tried to mitigate in the matter but he was also assaulted and received injuries. The injured Awanish Kumar Patel the son of the informant was sent for medical examination who was admitted in the hospital and subsequently his death was caused due to the injuries sustained by him. FIR was lodged and after investigation charge sheet has not been submitted so far against the present accused applicants.

¶10

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have no concern with the present matter. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. It is further argued that investigation is goingon and till date no charge-sheet has been submitted against the accused applicants. It is further submitted that the prosecution story as mentioned in the FIR is not corroborated by the statements of the witnesses and other ocular witnesses of the case. It is further submitted that the present accused applicants were having no motive to commit the crime. The prosecution story is not plausible at all because the medical report does not corroborate the prosecution story and it was not possible that about 20-25 persons were engaged in strangulating a single deceased. It is further submitted that the applicants have no criminal history to their credit. It is lastly submitted that in case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. It is further

¶12

NABAIL No. 9864 of 2025

¶13

¶14

submitted that a large number of people surrounded the deceased in the fateful night and the deceased was bitterly assaulted by them. The injuries subsequently were proved to be fatal for the deceased. It is further submitted that at this stage there is no possibility of false implication of the applicants in this case. The murder of a young boy was committed in this matter and since there was no possibility of false implication they are not entitled for any protection by way of granting anticipatory bail.

¶15

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled held that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, llikelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶16

Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, also considering the several injuries upon the body of the deceased which was sustained by him during course of present occurrence, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, I deem it not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicants. Prayer made in the application is refused.

¶17

8. The anticipatory bail application is rejected .

¶18

December 10, 2025 Fhd

¶19

(Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shyam Surat Patel and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Shyam Surat Patel and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gaurav Goyal vs State of U.P.

Guddu Sonkar vs State of U.P. and Another

Avanish Pandey vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Man Mohan vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ajay Alias Bacchi vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunil Kumar vs State of U.P.