MANVENDRA TIWARI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. HOME LKO.
NABAIL/894/2025 · 2025-07-22
Karunesh Singh Pawar
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 152701 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 152701 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:41918 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 894 of 2025 Applicant :- Manvendra Tiwari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rizwanul Haque Ansari,Santi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. 1.The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.132 of 2025 under sections 109, 351(3) BNS, P.S. Dostpur, district Sultanpur. 2.Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 3.In the prosecution case, it is alleged that when a police party was busy in checking vehicles at about 9.45p.m. on 31.5.2025, one motorcycle was seen coming from Sahinawan which was tried to be stopped by Vivek Bhadauriya, Constable. It is further alleged that at that time the accused persons made two round firing. Further allegation is that three persons were sitting on the bike and one of them was identified as Ankur Singh. 4.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent. He has been falsely implicated. No one has received any injury either from the police side or from the accused side. No test identification parade has been conducted to identify the applicant except confessional statement of Ankur Singh in police custody. There is no material against the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation. 5.Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer
made by applicant's counsel but could not dispute the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 6.Considering the above aspects of the matter, the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he will cooperate in the investigation, it is a case of no injujury, there is no independent witness to the recovery of 315 bore country made pistol, one live cartridge and two empty cartridges, investigation is going on, as also the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant protection to the applicant. 7.In view of the above, the application is allowed and it is provided that the applicant shall report to the investigating officer within 10 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, who shall enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount. 8.The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witnesses. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to proceed in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 22.7.2025 kkb/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench