Allahabad High Court

2. Heard Shri Shadab Ali, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Pankaj Saxena, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 76 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 386, 307, 506/34 of I.P.C., Police Station Kareli, District Prayagraj, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that similarly placed co-accused Abney Ahmad has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated

18.03.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.7965 of 2024. It is also submitted that co-accused Ran Vijay Singh, who has assigned the role of firing on the first informant has already been granted regular bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is further submitted that the first informant/ victim has not supported the prosecution case before the learned trial Court. It is also submitted that the another witness, namely, Ashraf has not supported the prosecution case before the learned Sessions Court. It is also submitted that the investigation against the applicant is still under progress. It is also 2 NABAIL No. 9455 of 2025 submitted that the applicant is having criminal history, which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed today. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and it has been submitted by him that the anticipatory bail of the applicant was dismissed on 22.07.2024 by the learned Sessions Court and he has moved before this Court in the month of November 2025, which is after delay of about one and half years, it seems that applicant is having no apprehension of arrest. It is further submitted that the witness PW-01, who has assigned the role of exhortation in his statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has turned hostile before the learned trial Court, which seems that the applicant is exerting pressure on the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant is having criminal history of nine cases and applicant is hardened criminal.

6. In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first information report has been lodged after a delay of 20 days and prior to lodging of the first information report, applicant has also lodged a case against the fist informant, which is a counterblast to the above case.

7. As per first information report, applicant and other co-accused persons are said to have entered into the property of the first informant and they have tried to grab the said property by use of force and they have also demanded extortion from the first informant and the applicant is said to have demanded Rs.50 Lacs as extortion money from the first informant. C o-accused Abney Ahmad has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 18.03.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.7965 of 2024. It is also submitted that co-accused Ran Vijay Singh, who has assigned the role of firing on the first informant has already been granted regular bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is also submitted that the applicant is having criminal history, which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed 3 NABAIL No. 9455 of 2025 today.

8. 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, 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.

9. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

10. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

11. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Mohd. Amir @ Bhutto involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned till submission of police report under Sections 173(2) Cr.P.C. / 193(3) BNSS, with the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (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/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 4 NABAIL No. 9455 of 2025

12. 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 applicant. December 1, 2025 RKM (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

2. Heard Shri Shadab Ali, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Pankaj Saxena, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 76 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 386, 307, 506/34 of I.P.C., Police Station Kareli, District Prayagraj, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that similarly placed co-accused Abney Ahmad has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated

18.03.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.7965 of 2024. It is also submitted that co-accused Ran Vijay Singh, who has assigned the role of firing on the first informant has already been granted regular bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is further submitted that the first informant/ victim has not supported the prosecution case before the learned trial Court. It is also submitted that the another witness, namely, Ashraf has not supported the prosecution case before the learned Sessions Court. It is also submitted that the investigation against the applicant is still under progress. It is also 2 NABAIL No. 9455 of 2025 submitted that the applicant is having criminal history, which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed today. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and it has been submitted by him that the anticipatory bail of the applicant was dismissed on 22.07.2024 by the learned Sessions Court and he has moved before this Court in the month of November 2025, which is after delay of about one and half years, it seems that applicant is having no apprehension of arrest. It is further submitted that the witness PW-01, who has assigned the role of exhortation in his statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has turned hostile before the learned trial Court, which seems that the applicant is exerting pressure on the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant is having criminal history of nine cases and applicant is hardened criminal.

6. In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first information report has been lodged after a delay of 20 days and prior to lodging of the first information report, applicant has also lodged a case against the fist informant, which is a counterblast to the above case.

7. As per first information report, applicant and other co-accused persons are said to have entered into the property of the first informant and they have tried to grab the said property by use of force and they have also demanded extortion from the first informant and the applicant is said to have demanded Rs.50 Lacs as extortion money from the first informant. C o-accused Abney Ahmad has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 18.03.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.7965 of 2024. It is also submitted that co-accused Ran Vijay Singh, who has assigned the role of firing on the first informant has already been granted regular bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is also submitted that the applicant is having criminal history, which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed 3 NABAIL No. 9455 of 2025 today.

8. 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, 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.

9. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

10. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

11. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Mohd. Amir @ Bhutto involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned till submission of police report under Sections 173(2) Cr.P.C. / 193(3) BNSS, with the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (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/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 4 NABAIL No. 9455 of 2025

12. 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 applicant. December 1, 2025 RKM (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)