Alihusen vs State Of U.P.
2025 Latest Caselaw 7990 ALL

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 7990 ALL
Judgement Date : 20 June, 2025

Allahabad High Court

Alihusen vs State Of U.P. on 20 June, 2025





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:98155
 
Court No. - 67
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4666 of 2025
 

 
Applicant :- Alihusen
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Kusum Mishra,Mithilesh Kumar Pandey
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.

1. Heard Ms Kusum Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The present application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in anticipation of his arrest in Case Crime No.319 of 2024, under Sections-87, 143(2) of BNS, Police Station-Kotwali Chunar, District-Mirzapur.

3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant has been falsely implicated, though, he was not named in the FIR. Even in the statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS, no specific allegation has been made against the applicant. It is further submitted that applicant has no criminal history.

4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

5. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations, gravity of offence and antecedents of applicant, he is entitled to get anticipatory bail till submission of police report under Section 193 B.N.S.S. as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

6. In the event of arrest, the applicant- Alihusen involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;