HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8520 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. Supplementary affidavit filed by the Learned counsel for the applicant today in Court, is taken on the record. 3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.489 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, Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, P.S. Kotwali, District- Bareilly, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the above-mentioned case. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the First Information Report has been lodged against 25 named and 1700 unnamed persons. The allegation in the FIR is that co-accused Maulana Taukir Raza has instigated the applicant 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 accused applicant submits that the applicant has no role but he has been falsely implicated. The investigation is continuing. The criminal history, which has kept on enhancing due to police action so far has been explained in the case. The accused applicant has a criminal history of 20 cases, out of which 13 cases have been lodged with respect to the present incident stated to be 'Bareilly riots'. The applicant is not a previous convict. The applicant wants to co-operate in the investigation but apprehending the arrest and seeks anticipatory bail. No specific role has been attributed to the applicant. The similarly situated co-accused Moin Khan, Waliuddin, Afzal Quiraishi and Nasir Khan have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in NABAIL Nos.7276/2026, 6087/2026, 5005/2026 and 9070 of 2026 and the co-accused Mohd. Naeem Qureshi @ Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : A.G.Karunakar, Ritesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Nadeem Khan .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Lali, Mohd. Moveen have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in 3699/2026. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, however could not dispute the fact that similarly situated co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the parties. 7. The applicant although named in the First Information Report, no specific role has been given to the applicant. The First Information Report has been lodged against 25 named and 1700 unnamed persons. The false implication of the applicant cannot be ruled out. Similarly situated co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. The criminal history of the applicant has been properly explained. 8. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to enlarge applicant on anticipatory bail. 9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. 10. In the event of the arrest of the applicant- Nadeem Khan, 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; 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail. 12. 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 8, 2026 Sachin NABAIL No. 8520 of 2026 2 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- SACHIN TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad