Ankit @ Shashikant Tiwari vs State of U.P. and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3342 of 2026

¶3

Ankit @ Shashikant Tiwari

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Avneesh Mishra, Vikrant Pratap Singh : G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 66

¶7

HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

¶8

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶9

Heard Sri Vikrant Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajnikant Rai, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

¶10

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 91 of 2026, under Sections 109(1), 351(3) BNS, Police Station Atraulia, District Azamgarh, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, till the conclusion of trial.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that as per allegation applicant opened fire upon the informant but admittedly none sustained any injury and therefore, it is a case of no injury and this fact suggests that on the basis of false allegation he has been made accused in the present matter.

¶12

He further submitted that investigation of the case is still pending and police is continuously trying to arrest the applicant.

¶13

He further submitted that however applicant is having criminal history of four other cases but out of four cases in two cases final reports have been submitted and in one case proceeding has been dropped and in one case relates to Arms Act applicant is on bail.

¶14

He further submitted that therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, merely on the basis of previous criminal history

¶15

NABAIL No. 3342 of 2026

¶16

2

¶17

of applicant his anticipatory bail application should not be dismissed.

¶18

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶19

I have heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the record of the case.

¶20

However, as per allegation applicant opened fire upon the informant and even he is having criminal history of four cases but admittedly none sustained any injury and it is a case of no injury.

¶21

Further criminal history of the applicant has been explained and it reflects in two cases final reports have been submitted and in one another case proceeding has been dropped and in case relates to Arms Act, applicant is on bail .

¶22

Further, investigation of the case is still pending and apprehension of arrest raised by applicant cannot be ruled out.

¶23

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in this case, till conclusion of trial.

¶24

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶25

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Ankit @ Shashikant Tiwari, involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶26

i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶27

ii. that 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶28

NABAIL No. 3342 of 2026

¶29

3

¶30

iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶31

iv. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶32

v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶33

vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶34

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶35

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶36

May 5, 2026 Ankita

¶37

(Sameer Jain,J.)

¶38

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ankit @ Shashikant Tiwari v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit @ Shashikant Tiwari 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ayushi Gupta vs State of U.P.

Aslam Ansari vs State of U.P.

Rohit Chauhan vs State of U.P.

Rani Devi vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jakir vs State of U.P.

Soniya vs State of U.P.