Jasveer and Another vs State of U.P.

1. Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Chandra Shekhar Saran, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶12

2. Present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 309 of 2025, under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) B.N.S., Police Station Kalan, District Shahjahanpur with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail.

¶13

3. At the very outset, learned A.G.A. submits that he has not received any instructions as yet.

¶14

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are innocent and they have an apprehension that they may be arrested in the abovementioned case. He further submits that no offence is made out against the applicants. It is further submitted that named co-accused Mukesh Kumar Singh has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 16.12.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 482 BNSS No. 9831 of 2025. It is submitted that the applicants are not named in the FIR and the recovery of money has been initiated against the institution/management of the school, which has been stayed by a Division Bench of this Court. It was also submitted that applicants undertake to cooperate 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.

¶15

5. 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, the 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

¶16

NABAIL No. 357 of 2026

¶17

2

¶18

exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶19

6. Considering the above submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants and without expressing any opinion on merits, the applicants- Jasveer and Hariram involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on interim anticipatory bail 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 till 16.2.2026 with the following conditions :-

¶20

(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;

¶21

(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;

¶22

(iii) The applicants would cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of interim interim anticipatory bail bail.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

8. List this case as fresh on 16.2.2026 in the top 20 cases.

¶26

9. In the meantime, learned AGA may obtain instructions in the matter.

¶27

January 19, 2026 Abhishek

¶28

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jasveer and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jasveer and Another v. State of U.P.

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

Similar cases

Anil Kumar Tiwari vs State of U.P. and Another

Arjun @ Ankur Saini vs State of U.P. and Another

Arpit Saxena vs State of U.P.

Vijay Kumar Sharma vs State of U.P. and Another

Zamirul Ui Islam and Another vs State of U.P.

Arpit Singh vs State of U.P.