HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 10783 of 2025 Court No. - 68 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard Sri Mohammad Waseem, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Paritosh Malviya, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of BNSS has been filed by the applicant- Altamas Khan with a prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0489 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 109(2), 118(2), 121(1), 189(5), 191(2), 191(3), 195(1), 196(1), 196(2), 223, 310(2), 324(5), 324(6), 61(2), 62 of BNS and Section 7 of CLA Act and Section 3/4 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, P.S. Kotwali, District- Bareilly during pendency of the trial. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has not been named in the FIR which is lodged by the police on 26.9.2025 against 25 named and 1700 unnamed persons. The allegation in the FIR is that co-accused Maulana Taukir Raza has instigated all the accused applicants and other co-accused to start an unruly protest against the Government wherein they have come out on road in heavy numbers and led to the damage of public property, raised slogans, stone pelting and taken the entire city for ransom. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has no role but he has been falsely implicated. The investigation is continuing. The accused applicant has 04 cases of criminal history. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that similarly circumstanced co-accused Mohd. Naeem Qureshi @ Lali has been granted anticipatory bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 27.4.2026 in Crl. Misc. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohammad Waseem Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Altamas Khan .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Anticipatory Bail Application U/s482 BNSS No.3699 of 2026. The accused applicant wants to co-operate in the investigation but apprehending the arrest and seeks anticipatory bail. No specific role has been attributed to applicant. 4. Learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. 5. The scope of ambit of anticipatory bail is encapsulated in three insightful judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court right from Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab reported in (1980) 2 SCC 565, Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694 and Sushila Aggarwal and others Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, wherein it is consistently held by Hon'ble Apex Court that while granting anticipatory bail, the Court should considering the application of the applicants to evaluate the threat or apprehension of arrest vis-a-vis the nature and gravity of accusation, criminal antecedent of the accused, false or exaggerated implication, need of custodial interrogation, willingness of the accused to cooperate in investigation and trial and the conduct of the accused and flight risk. 6. Considering the role of accused applicant as is collected by the Investigating Officer so far amongst 1700 co-accused, this Court while considering the gravity of accusation, explained criminal history and apprehension of arrest in the case vis-a-vis low flight risk and assurance of the accused in cooperating with the investigation and trial, is of considered view to grant anticipatory bail. 7. The applicant-Altamas Khan involved in the aforesaid case crime shall appear before the trial court or the Investigating Officer, as the case may be within 30 days from the date of this order and shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with following conditions :- (i) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as NABAIL No. 10783 of 2025 2 to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (ii) The applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. (iv) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court. (v) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. May 18, 2026 Ravi Prakash NABAIL No. 10783 of 2025 3 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad