Sunil and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

"1. Heard Ms. Swarnima Shukla, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Jawahir Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Uma Shankar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶12

2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 267 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 110 of B.N.S., Police Station Araula, District Azamgarh with the prayer that in the event of arrest, the applicant may be released on bail.

¶13

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that chargesheet in the case has been filed and none of the injuries suffered by injured is dangerous to life. It is further submitted that no specific role has been assigned to any of the applicants.

¶14

4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that some time may be granted to him for filing a detailed counter affidavit.

¶15

5. Considering the facts and circumstances and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicants Sunil, Prince and Abhishek in the event of their arrest, be released on interim anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned till 11.2.2026 with the following conditions :-

¶16

(i) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence and they would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court

¶17

NABAIL No. 95 of 2026

¶18

2

¶19

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 co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

7. Put up this case as fresh on 11.2.2026. 8. In the meantime, learned AGA is directed to obtain instructions in the matter by the next date fixed."

¶25

2. When the case has been called on today, learned A.G.A. states that he has received instructions.

¶26

3. Learned counsel for the applicants has argued that the applicants have cooperated in the investigation. The injuries suffered by the injured were not found dangerous to life and no specific role of assault on the injured has been assigned to any of the applicants. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. The applicants had been granted interim anticipatory bail and have not violated the terms thereof.

¶27

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail, however, could not dispute the fact that the applicants have no criminal antecedents nor the fact that they have not violated the conditions imposed in the interim order of this Court. Learned A.G.A. has informed that the charge-sheet has now been submitted and cognizance has also been taken by the Court on 22.09.2025.

¶28

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶29

6. The applicants though named in the First Information Report (FIR), have not been assigned any specific role. The applicants had been granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 12.01.2026. The applicants are not stated to have violated the interim order granted by this Court. The applicants have no criminal antecedents.

¶30

NABAIL No. 95 of 2026

¶31

3

¶32

7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the fact that now the charge sheet has been submitted and the applicants are no longer required for any custodial interrogation and all the offences are punishable with maximum imprisonment of seven years, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail.

¶33

8. The anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed .

¶34

10. In the event of the arrest of the applicants- Sunil, Prince and Abhishek, involved in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶35

i. that the applicants shall not tamper with evidence and that they would appears before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned;

¶36

ii. that 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶37

iii. that the applicants would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail;

¶38

iv. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

¶39

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

¶40

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case.

¶41

March 18, 2026 Kushal

¶42

(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)

¶43

Digitally signed by :- KUSHAL AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sunil and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil and 2 Others 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sheeshkali Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neha @ Neha Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Laxman Singh @ Satyam vs State of U.P.

Ramnaresh Sahu Vs State of U.P.

Prakash Anand Rao vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Harsh Arya vs State of U.P.