Zamirul Ui Islam and Another vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2026)

Zamirul Ui Islam and Another vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim anticipatory bail till 16.02.2026 to the applicants on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions; learned AGA directed to obtain instructions by the next date; case to be listed fresh on 16.02.2026. Final disposal of the anticipatory bail application deferred.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicants Zamirul Ul Islam and Smt. Rubina are entitled to anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 376 of 2020 under Section 406 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Bulandshahr.

Court's answer

In the event of arrest, the applicants Zamirul Ul Islam and Smt. Rubina are to be released on interim anticipatory bail till 16.02.2026 on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, subject to conditions: (i) not to tamper with evidence and to appear before the trial Court on dates fixed unless exempted; (ii) not to directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts so as to dissuade disclosure; (iii) to co-operate during trial and not misuse the liberty of bail; (iv) not to leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned.

Ratio / Principle

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

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.) — Anticipatory bail application under Section 482 BNSS (No. 313 of 2026) by Zamirul Ul Islam and Smt. Rubina in Case Crime No. 376 of 2020, Section 406 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Bulandshahr. Earlier cognizance under Sections 420/406 I.P.C. was challenged in a Section 482 Cr.P.C. proceeding, which was allowed with remand for fresh cognizance; the Magistrate then summoned the applicants to face trial only under Section 406 I.P.C., and it was submitted that the maximum punishment is three years. Referring to Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 (parameters: nature and gravity of accusation, antecedents of the accused, possibility of flight from justice, evaluation of the entire material, and the exact role of the accused), the Court released the applicants on interim anticipatory bail till 16.02.2026 on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, imposing conditions against tampering with evidence, inducement or threat to witnesses, misuse of the liberty of bail, and leaving India without prior permission, with liberty to the prosecution to seek cancellation on default. Learned AGA stated that instructions had not yet been received and was directed to obtain them by the next date; the case was listed fresh on 16.02.2026.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 313 of 2026

Zamirul Ui Islam And Another

.....Applicant(s)

Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ahamad Farhan, Haya Rizvi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 72

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

Heard Ms. Haya Rizvi, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri J.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no.376 of 2020, under Section 406 of IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Bulandshahr, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail.

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that initially, the cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate for the offences under Sections 420, 406 of I.P.C. and it was challenged before this Court by filing an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and the same was allowed and the matter was remanded back to the learned Magistrate for taking cognizance afresh. It is further submitted that the learned Magistrate has summoned the applicants to face trial for the offence under Section 406 of I.P.C. It is further submitted that the maximum conviction, which can be imposed on conviction is 3 years. It was also submitted that applicants undertake to co-operate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

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

NABAIL No. 313 of 2026

2

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.

In the event of arrest of the applicants - Zamirul Ul Islam and Smt. Rubina involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on interim anticipatory bail till 16.02.2026 on their 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 :-

(i) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence and that they would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned;

(ii) The applicants 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;

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

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

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 applicants.

List this case on 16.02.2026 as fresh.

Learned AGA is directed to obtain instructions in the matter by the next date.

January 19, 2026 RKM

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

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