Dismissed¶14

Devendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Anticipatory Bail – Section 482 BNSS

Allahabad HC13 Mar 2026NABAIL/399/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail; Section 482 BNSS; application dismissed as not pressed; liberty for regular bail within two weeks; expeditious disposal; Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI; SLP (Cri) No. 5191 of 2021; Sections 419, 420, 467, 120-B IPC; cheating, forgery, criminal conspiracy; case crime No. 86 of 2025; P.S. Gosainganj, Lucknow; criminal antecedents — three pending cases; Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench; Karunesh Singh Pawar, J.; March 13, 2026.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the applicant to file a regular bail application within two weeks, to be decided expeditiously strictly in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (SLP (Cri) No. 5191 of 2021). ¶14

Devendra Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 399 of 2026

¶3

Devendra Pratap Singh

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

¶7

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Mohammad Aslam Beg
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 15

¶9

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶10

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for State.

¶11

2. The present application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.86 of 2025 under sections 419, 420, 467, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Gosainganj, district Lucknow.

¶12

3. Learned A.G.A. submits that the applicant has a chequered history of three cases which has not been explained in the bail application.

¶13

4.Learned counsel for applicant, at this stage, submits that he does not want to press the anticipatory bail application; rather he may be granted liberty to file regular bail application and the same may be decided in the light of judgment of Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another Special Leave to Appeal (Cri)No.5191 of 2021 .

¶14

5. In view of the above, prayer for anticipatory bail is refused and the application is dismissed as not pressed. However, it is provided that in case the applicant files a regular bail application within two weeks from today, the same be decided expeditiously, strictly in view of the law laid down by

¶15

NABAIL No. 399 of 2026

¶16

¶17

Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another Special Leave to Appeal (Cri)No.5191 of 2021.

¶18

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶19

March 13, 2026 kkb/

¶20

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Devendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Amit Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Himanshu Dixit vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Panchayati Raj Lko. and 3 Others

Vikash Singhal vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical Health and Family Welfare Lko. and Others

Govind Gupta @ Vishal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Satish Rajendra Saroj vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Idrish vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.