Nayab Khan Alias Nimma vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2026)

Nayab Khan Alias Nimma vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted to applicant Nayab Khan alias Nimma in Case Crime No. 1146 of 2025 during the pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (i)-(iii); in default of any condition, the order automatically stands vacated.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Nayab Khan alias Nimma is entitled to anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 1146 of 2025 (P.S. Baradari, District Bareilly) under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 125, 352, 124(2), 351(3), 121, 221, 109, 299, 223, 61(2) BNS and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act. +1 more

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A., perusal of record, and the fact that other co-accused persons have already been granted bail by coordinate Bench, and without making any comment on the merits of the case, there appears ground to grant anticipatory bail in favour of the applicant during the pendency of trial.

Ratio / Principle

Anticipatory bail was granted on the parity ground: other co-accused persons have already been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court, a fact the learned AGA could not dispute.

Key takeaways

The applicant Nayab Khan alias Nimma is to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions: (i) appearance before the learned court every day when the case is fixed except exempted; (ii) no direct or indirect inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade disclosure; (iii) not leaving India without previous permission of the Court and deposit of passport, if any, before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.ratio¶17
In default of any of the bail conditions, the anticipatory bail order will automatically stand vacated.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail under S. 482 BNSS (NABAIL No. 2017 of 2026) — applicant named in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 1146 of 2025 under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 125, 352, 124(2), 351(3), 121, 221, 109, 299, 223, 61(2) BNS and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S. Baradari, District Bareilly — no specific role assigned except riot and general role; injuries on two persons simple; apprehension of imminent arrest — co-accused (Mustkeem @ Mohd Mustakeem, Umaid Alias Umaid Ahmad, Arif @ Arif Khan, Mohd Naeem Qureshi @ Lali, Ajmal Rafi) already granted bail by coordinate Bench on 24.11.2025, 16.12.2025, 07.01.2026, 11.02.2026 and 27.02.2026; role of applicant not distinguishable — HELD: without commenting on merits, ground made out for anticipatory bail during pendency of trial on parity; applicant to be released on personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions of appearance, non-tampering and non-departure from India (passport deposit if any); on default of any condition the order automatically stands vacated.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2017 of 2026

Nayab Khan Alias Nimma

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ehtesham Afsar Khan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 83

HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nitesh Kumar Srivastava, learned AGA for the State.

The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No. 1146 of 2025, under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 125, 352, 124(2), 351(3), 121, 221, 109, 299, 223, 61(2) BNS and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S. Baradari, District Bareilly

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case for committing the offence of rioting. Further submitted that he was named in the F.I.R. No specific role has been assigned to the present applicant except riot and general role. The injuries said to be caused on two persons were simple in nature. There is no any credible evidence to connect the applicant with the crime. Criminal history against the applicant has been explained properly. Other named and unnamed co-accused persons namely, Mustkeem @ Mohd Mustakeem, Umaid Alias Umaid Ahmad, Arif @ Arif Khan, Mohd Naeem Qureshi @ Lali and another, Ajmal Rafi have already been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court on 24.11.2025, 16.12.2025, 07.01.2026, 11.02.2026 and 27.02.2026 through Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 41334 of 2025, 41167 of 2025, 45933 of 2025, 1121 of 2026 and 1095 of 2026. Since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused who have already granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant is under apprehension of imminent arrest. In

NABAIL No. 2017 of 2026

2

case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the trial, so requested for anticipatory bail.

Learned AGA opposed the prayer as aforesaid but could not dispute the fact that above noted co-accused persons have already been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court. .

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record and fact that other co-accused persons have already been gratned bail by coordinate Bench of this Court, without making any comment on the merits of the case there appears ground to grant anticipatory bail in favour of the applicant during the pendency of trial.

Let the applicant Nayab Khan alias Nimma be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall appear before the learned court everyday when case is fixed except exempted;

(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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office;

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

In default of any of the conditions, this order will automatically stand vacated.

March 18, 2026 Anurag Singh

(Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.)

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad