Dismissed¶18

Mitthu Mishra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 May 2026NABAIL/2569/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Jai Prakash Tiwari, J.), Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. 2569 of 2026, Mitthu Mishra v. State of U.P., decided May 6, 2026 - anticipatory bail rejected; NDPS Act Sections 8/22; BNS Section 111; specific allegations in FIR against applicant among six accused; P.S. Rohaniya, Varanasi.

What did the court decide?

The FIR lodged against six accused persons contains specific allegations against the present applicant, and no good ground is made out for grant of anticipatory bail; the applicant may avail remedy before the appropriate forum if aggrieved. ¶17

Mitthu Mishra Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2569 of 2026

¶3

Mitthu Mishra

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of U.P.

¶7

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Raj Raghuvanshi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 70

¶9

HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶11

This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 63/2025 under Sections - 8/22 Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,1985, and Section- 111 of BNS Police Station - Rohaniya District - Varanasi, during the pendency of trial.

¶12

Urge has been made on behalf of the applicant that the applicant has no concern with the offence alleged against him. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. No offence has been committed by the applicant. In case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, there is no possibility of misusing the liberty of anticipatory bail.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has contended that the accusation levelled against the applicant is specific.

¶14

Insofar as the allegations are concerned, the same is very much apparent from the record that the FIR has been lodged against six accused persons including the applicant. It is also apparent that specific allegation has been made in the FIR against the present applicant. In this case, bare perusal of the first information report itself shows that the allegations are specific

¶15

NABAIL No. 2569 of 2026

¶16

¶17

against the applicant. No good ground is made out for anticipatory bail. In case the applicant has any grievance, he may avail remedy before the appropriate forum.

¶18

Consequently, the instant anticipatory bail application is rejected .

¶19

It is made clear that observation made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case.

¶20

(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)

¶21

May 6, 2026 S.K.

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SWEETY KANOJIA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mitthu Mishra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mitthu Mishra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajnish Singh @ Sahil Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Amit Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Ravindra Pal Alias Ravindra Pal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Lekhraj Amarnani vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Devendra Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Anshu Kumar Dubey vs State of U.P.