Virendra Kumar Harijan Vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2451 of 2026

Virendra Kumar Harijan		.....Applicant(s)
	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Pawan Giri
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 72

¶5

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶6

Heard Shri Pawan Giri, learned counsel for the applicant, Ram Singh Kushwaha, learned counsel for the first informant, Shri Chandra Shekhar Saran, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No.104 of 2021, under Sections 392, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station Jhunsi, District Prayagraj, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the applicant has been summoned to face trial in a complaint case and he is ready and willing to cooperate in the trial. It is further submitted that the entire allegations in the complaint is false. It is also 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 of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

On the other hand, learned counsel for the first informant has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and it has been submitted by him that the applicant has not cooperated in the trial. It is further submitted that the

¶10

NABAIL No. 2451 of 2026

¶11

2

¶12

applicant and other co-accused persons are said to have assaulted the complainant, who is the principal of I.T.I. College and they have also looted Rs.15,000/- cash from him on gun point. He further submits that the applicant had approached before this Court by filing an application under Article 227, which has been disposed of with a direction to the applicant to approach before the learned court concerned for regular bail in accordance with the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another.

¶13

In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the remedy available in law cannot be curtailed by any judicial order.

¶14

Learned AGA has also opposed the application for anticipatory bail.

¶15

Applicant has been summoned to face trial in a complaint case and he is ready and willing to cooperate in the trial. As per allegations in the complaint, the applicant and other co-accused persons are said to have assaulted the complainant, who is the principal of I.T.I. College and they have also looted Rs.15,000/- cash from him on gun point. It is also submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history.

¶16

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, 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.

¶17

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

¶18

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶19

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Virendra Kumar Harijan

¶20

NABAIL No. 2451 of 2026

¶21

3

¶22

involved in the aforesaid case crime 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 :-

¶23

(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;

¶24

(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;

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

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.

¶28

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶29

March 19, 2026

¶30

RKM

¶31

Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Virendra Kumar Harijan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Kumar Harijan 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rahul Vs State of U.P.

Shiva and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Sarita Alias Guddal Alias Guddi Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Salman Vs State of U.P.

Gudiya Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Farman @ Farman Pradhan Vs State of U.P.