Taiyab @ Amaruddin v. State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9673 of 2026

Taiyab @ Amaruddin

.....Applicant(s)

Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Damodar Singh, Devendra Vikram Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Court No. - 71

HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant; and Learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 26 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 118(1) and 109 of the B.N.S., 2023, Police Station – Barwapatti, District Kushinagar, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the aforesaid case.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant and the other accused have been falsely nominated in the First Information Report (FIR). A general role was given to the applicant. Initially, during investigation, the applicant and co-accused Kyamuddin Ansari and Mustakeem had filed a writ petition being Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 10544 of 2025 in which this Court vide the order dated 29.05.2025 was pleased to stay the arrest of the applicant and the other accused. The said writ petition was finally dismissed vide order dated 15.04.2026 after filing of a charge sheet which necessitated the applicant to seek anticipatory bail. Learned counsel has further submitted that co-accused Mustakeem had been granted anticipatory bail till filing of a police report by this Court in NABAIL No. 4435 of 2026 and Kyamuddin Ansari has been granted anticipatory bail in NABAIL No. 7851 of 2026. The case of the applicant stands on a similar footing.