Allahabad High Court
Habeeb Ahamad And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ... on 8 October, 2025
Author: Karunesh Singh Pawar
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:61856
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1095 of 2025
Habeeb Ahamad And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Vimal Kishor Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A.
HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1.The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.198 of 2022 under sections 417, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Utraula, district Balrampur.
2.Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
3.Learned A.G.A. has raised a preliminary objection that earlier the applicants had filed an application under section 482 No.3152 of 2025 which was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 16.4.2025 wherein on the prayer made on behalf of the applicants, it was directed by the court that the applicants shall surrender before the concerned court within four weeks from the date of the order and in case they apply for bail, the bail application shall be disposed of expeditiously. Interim restraint from arrest was also made by the court. It is submitted that the said order has not been complied with and no regular bail as directed by the court has been filed by the applicants, although protection of four weeks pursuant to the said order appears to have been enjoyed by the applicants. Therefore, the applicants are not entitled to be granted anticipatory bail.
4.I have considered the submission and perused the order dated 16.4.2025, relevant part whereof is extracted below :
"8. The relief as sought by the applicants is refused.
9. However considering the aforesaid alternative prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants, it is directed that the applicants shall surrender before the concerned Court below a within four weeks from today, and in case they apply for bail, the bail application of the applicants shall be disposed off expeditiously by the Court below in accordance with law and keeping in view the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra).
10. For the period of four weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicants before the concerned Court below, whichever is earlier, they shall not be arrested in the above case.
11. With the above observations and directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed off."
5.Learned counsel for the applicants could not give any justification as to why regular bail has not been filed by the applicants in the time fixed by the court while disposing the petition under section 482 CrPC. Accordingly, since the condition imposed by the court vide order, above extracted, has not been complied with by the applicants, it would not be appropriate to show indulgence in this case as the applicants have, though, availed four weeks' protection granted by the court, other part of the order has not been complied by them.
6.In view of the above, this application for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)
October 8, 2025
kkb/
