Allowed¶5

Arbind Rajbhar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Feb 2026NABAIL/1079/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail - S. 482 BNSS - interim anticipatory bail granted - BNS Ss. 76, 333, 351(2), 352 - allegation of sexual assault, general role - co-accused Vimlesh Rajbhar - no criminal history - readiness to co-operate in trial - AGA without instructions - personal bond Rs. 50,000 with two sureties - bail conditions - cancellation on default - Case Crime No. 305 of 2024 - P.S. Tarwa, District Azamgarh - listed fresh 16.3.2026 - Allahabad High Court - Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted to applicant Arbind Rajbhar in the event of arrest till 16.3.2026 on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to stated conditions; case to be listed fresh on 16.3.2026 and AGA to obtain instructions by the next date. ¶5

Arbind Rajbhar vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶5

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Arbind Rajbhar, arraigned in Case Crime No. 305 of 2024 under Sections 76, 333, 351(2), 352 of B.N.S., P.S. Tarwa, District Azamgarh, is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest.

¶11

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the applicant Arbind Rajbhar is to be released on interim anticipatory bail in the event of arrest on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, till 16.3.2026.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

The interim anticipatory bail is subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence, appearance before trial Court, no inducement/threat/promise, co-operation in trial, not leaving India without permission), and in default of any condition the prosecution may apply for cancellation of the interim anticipatory bail.

¶22

Key takeaways

Learned AGA is directed to obtain instructions in the matter by the next date fixed, the case having been put up fresh on 16.3.2026.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.), in an application under Section 482 BNSS, granted interim anticipatory bail to Arbind Rajbhar, accused in Case Crime No. 305 of 2024 under Sections 76, 333, 351(2), 352 of B.N.S., P.S. Tarwa, District Azamgarh. Counsel contended the first informant levelled a general role of sexual assault against the applicant and co-accused Vimlesh Rajbhar; the applicant had no criminal history and was ready to co-operate in trial. The learned A.G.A. had no instructions. Without expressing any opinion on merits, the Court released the applicant on interim anticipatory bail in the event of arrest on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount till 16.3.2026, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence, appearance before trial Court, no inducement/threat/promise, co-operation in trial, no departure from India without permission); on default the prosecution may seek cancellation. AGA directed to obtain instructions; case listed fresh on 16.3.2026.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1079 of 2026

Arbind Rajbhar

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Gulab Chand Bharati, Kaushlendra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 72

¶9

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶10

Heard Sri Kaushlendra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri C.S. Saran, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶11

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 305 of 2024 under Sections 76, 333, 351(2), 352 of B.N.S., Police Station Tarwa, District Azamgarh with the prayer that in the event of arrest, the applicant may be released on bail.

¶12

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the first informant has levelled general role of sexual assault to the applicant and co-accused Vimlesh Rajbhar. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history to his credit and he is ready and willing to co-operate in the trial.

¶13

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. submits that he has not received instructions in the matter as yet.

¶14

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant Arbind Rajbhar in the event of his arrest, be released on interim 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 till 16.3.2026 with the following conditions :-

¶15

(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

¶16

NABAIL No. 1079 of 2026

¶17

¶18

concerned;

¶19

(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;

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶23

Put up this case as fresh on 16.3.2026.

¶24

In the meantime, learned AGA is directed to obtain instructions in the matter by the next date fixed.

¶25

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶26

February 4, 2026

¶27

Madhurima

¶28

Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arbind Rajbhar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arbind Rajbhar 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay Kumar Sharma vs State of U.P. and Another

Arun Rosval vs State of U.P.

Dinesh vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Anju Pandey vs State of U.P.

Sajid Husain vs State of U.P.