Allahabad High Court
NABAIL/9359/2026 of MASHKOOR Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 10 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9359 of 2026 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. The present application has
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
Court No. - 75
HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.
2. The present application has been moved on behalf of applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 156 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 354B, 376, 511 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 OF Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kutubsher, District Saharanpur, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, he may be released on anticipatory bail.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second anticipatory bail application moved on behalf of the applicant. Earlier in the first anticipatory bail application moved on behalf of applicant, this Court had granted interim protection till the submission of charge sheet. However, the said anticipatory bail application has been dismissed for want of prosecution. Now charge sheet has been filed against the applicant. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. It has further been submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedents and that no coercive process has been issued against him so far. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to cooperate during investigation and 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 cooperate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
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, Court must consider Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ankur Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mashkoor .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
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.
6. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has made specific allegation of rape against him, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, no case for anticipatory bail is made out.
7. The anticipatory bail application is rejected. September 11, 2026 Mustaqeem. NABAIL No. 9359 of 2026
(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad