Anas v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Jan 2026BAIL/227/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application; Allahabad High Court; police encounter; grievous injury to accused; non-registration of FIR; statement not recorded before Magistrate or Medical Officer; compliance with People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. State of Maharashtra, 2014 (10) SCC 635; preparation of dacoity; recovery of Rs.700/- and country-made pistol; false implication; AGA to seek instructions; Investigating Officer personal appearance; listed fresh 28.01.2026; interim directions; Anas v. State of U.P.; Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, J.

What did the court decide?

No bail decision at this stage; interim directions issued - AGA to seek instructions on FIR registration and statement-recording compliance with PUCL, matter listed fresh for 28.01.2026, and the concerned Investigating Officer to appear personally with the relevant record. ¶¶18

Anas vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in the alleged dacoity-preparation case, given the contention that no incriminating material beyond Rs.700/- and a country-made pistol was recovered and that he was falsely implicated. +1 more

¶¶12

Ratio / Principle

Learned AGA is directed to seek instructions whether any FIR was registered regarding the grievous injuries suffered by the applicant in the police encounter and whether his statement was recorded in compliance with the Apex Court's judgment in People's Union for Civil Liberties (supra), as well as investigation thereof.

¶¶14

Key takeaways

The bail application is to be put up as fresh on 28.01.2026.ratio¶¶18
On the next date, the concerned Investigating Officer is to appear personally before the Court along with the relevant record.ratio¶¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, J.), interim order dated January 16, 2026 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 227 of 2026, Anas v. State of U.P.: The applicant, arrested along with co-accused in a case of alleged preparation of dacoity, sought bail. Counsel contended that after arrest nothing incriminating was recovered except Rs.700/- and one country-made pistol, and that although the applicant suffered grievous injury to his leg in a police encounter, the police lodged no FIR and his statement was not recorded before any Magistrate or Medical Officer as required by the Supreme Court in People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. State of Maharashtra, 2014 (10) SCC 635; hence, he was falsely implicated. The learned AGA sought time to verify compliance. The Court directed the AGA to seek instructions whether any FIR was registered regarding the grievous injuries suffered in the encounter and whether the applicant's statement was recorded in compliance with PUCL, as well as investigation thereof; put the matter up as fresh on 28.01.2026; and directed the concerned Investigating Officer to appear personally on that date with the relevant record. Bail merits were not decided at this stage.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 227 of 2026

Anas

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Abhishe Pandey, Praveen Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 69

¶10

HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.

¶11

Heard Sri Abhishek Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Roshan Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶12

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant was implicated in this case on his arrest showing that the applicant was involved along with other co-accused person in preparation of dacoity. Though, after the arrest of the applicant, no incriminating material except Rs.700/- and one country made pistol was recovered. It is further submitted that in the aforesaid police encounter, applicant received grievous injury in his leg but the police has not lodged any FIR neither statement of the applicant was not recorded before any Magistrate or Medical Officer as required by the Apex Court in the case of People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2014 (10) SCC 635 . Therefore, applicant has been falsely implicated.

¶13

Learned AGA seeks time to verify whether any FIR was registered and statement of the injured applicant was recorded by the Magistrate in compliance of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of People's Union for Civil Liberties (supra) .

¶14

Considering the aforesaid request, learned AGA is directed to seek instructions whether any FIR was registered regarding the grievous injuries suffered by the applicant in police encounter as well as recording of the statement in compliance of judgement of the Apex Court in the case of People's Union for Civil Liberties (supra) as

¶15

BAIL No. 227 of 2026

¶16

¶17

well as investigation thereof.

¶18