HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9851 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant and Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 383 of 2026, under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of B.N.S., Police Station- Baghpat, District Baghpat, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the abovementioned case. 3. The Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegation is of the STF arresting four accused, recovering a laptop, mobile phones and some cash with the allegation that the said accused were preparing fake royalty (ISTP- Inter State Transit Pass) which was causing revenue loss to the State Government. The Learned counsel for the applicant has further contended that the mobile phone of one of the accused, Talib, was checked by the police in which allegedly one message regarding one ISTP had allegedly been sent to the applicant about a year prior to his arrest. The Learned counsel for the applicant has also contended that except the said material, there is no other direct evidence against the applicant. The Learned counsel for the applicant has lastly contended that the FIR has been lodged against 23 accused persons. Similarly situated co-accused Mustfa has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in NABAIL No. 8115 of 2026. The case of the applicant stands on a similar footing. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kuldeep Tripathi, Shiv Shanker Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Bheem Priya Bhanu .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 4. The learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, but does not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the parties. 6. The FIR has been lodged against 23 named accused persons with no specific allegation against the applicant. Similarly situated co-accused Mustfa has been granted anticipatory bail. The case of the applicant stands on a similar footing. Applicant has no criminal antecedents. 7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to enlarge applicant on anticipatory bail. 8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. 9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant- Bheem Priya Bhanu, he shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court concerned with the following conditions:- i. the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii. that 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; iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness; 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned NABAIL No. 9851 of 2026 2 shall be at liberty to cancel the bail. 11. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case. September 29, 2026 Junaid NABAIL No. 9851 of 2026 3 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- JUNAID AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad