Pushpendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3677 of 2026

¶3

Pushpendra Kumar

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others			.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Rakesh Kumar Narayan Singh	Yadav,	Satyendra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 70

¶7

HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.65 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Ghiror, District Mainpuri during the pendency of the trial.

¶10

3.It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that initially first information report in Case Crime No. 65 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Ghiror, District Mainpuri has been lodged and thereafter, after investigation, final report was submitted by the investigating officer on 10.04.2023. After submission of the first final report, further investigation was ordered by the Higher officials of the police concerned and thereafter, again second final report was submitted by the investigating officer on 07.06.2023. Thereafter, after two years, protest application was filed by the informant that is father of the deceased and present applicant was summoned vide order dated 09.11.2025. Thereafter, criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. No. 5582 of 2006 was filed by Shanti Devi and others Versus State of U.P. and another, in which summoning order dated 09.11.2025 was quashed in regard to applicant no.6-Mamta (Nanad) and application is partly allowed vide order dated 15.05.2018. Further

¶11

NABAIL No. 3677 of 2026

¶12

2

¶13

Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 482 B.N.S.S. No. 10767 of 2025 has been filed by Shailendra Kumar alias Raju and this Court allowed the application vide order dated 19.02.2025. He also submitted that during the course of inquiry, affidavits have been filed by the informant and other family members of the deceased in support of the present applicant. He further argued that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. He has been falsely implicated in this case. If the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest by the police any time.

¶14

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the anticipatory bail.

¶15

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the law on the subject finally by holding that the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

¶16

It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till trial.

¶17

It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶18

Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant

¶19

NABAIL No. 3677 of 2026

¶20

3

¶21

till the trial.

¶22

The application is allowed accordingly.

¶23

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Pushpendra Kumar , he shall be released on anticipatory bail till the end of trial 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:-

¶24

(i) The applicant shall make himself available before the Court concerned on the date fixed in the matter and will cooperate in the trial.

¶25

(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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.

¶26

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶27

In case of default of any of the conditions, the same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant.

¶28

(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)

¶29

May 6, 2026

¶30

T.S.

¶31

Digitally signed by :- TRIBHUWAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pushpendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pushpendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

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.