Disposed¶9

Harveer and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Feb 2026NABAIL/733/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail; S.482 BNSS; Harveer and another v. State of U.P. and another; Allahabad High Court; Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 733 of 2026; Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.; interim protection extended; case listed fresh on 30.3.2026; interlocutory listing order dated 25.02.2026.

What did the court decide?

Interim order, if any, extended till the next date of listing; matter to be listed as fresh on 30.3.2026. No final decision on the anticipatory bail prayer was made. ¶9

Harveer and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 733 of 2026

Harveer And Another

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

¶7

		.....O	pposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Amit Kumar Jaya Tripathi,	Pandey, Ankush Rahul Yadav	Yadav,
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 72

¶9

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶10

1. Heard Shri Rahul Yadav assisted by Shri Amit Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and Shri Shiv Dutt Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶11

2. Present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0449 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 201 IPC, Police Station Jasrana, District- Firozabad with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail.

¶12

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

¶13

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 above-mentioned case. He further submits that no offence is made out against the applicants. The applicants were served with notice under Section 41-A of the CrPC during investigation and now chargesheet has been submitted in this case. It is further submitted that without any summon or bailable warrant, non-bailable warrants were issued against them. The applicants are having no previous criminal history. It is further submitted that applicants undertake to co-operate 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

¶14

NABAIL No. 733 of 2026

¶15

¶16

investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶17

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

¶18

6. Considering the above submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants and without expressing any opinion on merits, the applicants- Harveer and Smt. Guddi Devi 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 25.02.2026 with the following conditions :-

¶19

(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;

¶20

(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;

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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.

¶24

8. List this case as fresh on 25.02.2026.

¶25

NABAIL No. 733 of 2026

¶26

¶27

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

¶28

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶29

January 28, 2026

¶30

Rama Kant

¶31

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

Harveer and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harveer and Another 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Salman vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Amzad vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Kumar Maurya and Another vs State of U.P.

Shyam Sundar Chauhan vs State of U.P.

Mohd Jakirul vs State of U.P.