Guddu @ Sachin Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4030 of 2026

¶3

Guddu @ Sachin Kumar Singh

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Maneesh Tiwari, Pawan Kumar Shukla 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. 221 of 2026 under Sections 74, 333 BNS & 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Majhola, District Moradabad.

¶10

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present matter due to ulterior motive. It is next submitted that FIR of the present case was lodged on the basis of false and frivolous facts and no specific time of the incident was mentioned. It is next submitted that as per statements of the victim, applicant entered in her house and molested her but applicant has not committed any offence as alleged by prosecution and there is no evidence against the applicant with regard to the said offence. It is next submitted that applicant is having apprehension of arrest by the police any time in the abovementioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. If the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty and will cooperate with the investigation/trial.

¶11

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

¶12

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. It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused,

¶13

NABAIL No. 4030 of 2026

¶14

2

¶15

continue after filing of the charge sheet till trial. 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.

¶16

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 till the trial.

¶17

The application is allowed accordingly.

¶18

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Guddu @ Sachin Kumar Singh shall be released on anticipatory bail till the end of trial on 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:-

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)

¶24

May 12, 2026 KK Patel

¶25

Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Guddu @ Sachin Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu @ Sachin Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pankaj and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Yadav vs State of U.P.

Priti Sagar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ramachal vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashish Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Suryakant Mishra Vs State of U.P.