RAJBIR SINGH TYAGI AND 3 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
NABAIL/8220/2026 · 2026-09-07
Rajiv Lochan Shukla
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6123 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6123 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8220 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicants, the Learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, Learned counsel for the informant.
2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No. 380 of 2026, under Sections 318(4), 316(2) and 351(2) of the B.N.S., 2023, Police Station – Hapur Nagar, District Hapur, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail, as the applicants apprehend their arrest in the aforesaid case.
3. At the very outset, the Learned A.G.A. has raised an objection regarding the maintainability of the instant application by submitting that the applicants do not apprehend their arrest as the offences that have been alleged against the applicants do not entail in the event of a conviction, a punishment of more than seven years. He further contends that appropriate protection has been provided in the BNSS itself in the form of Section 35(3) BNSS and the judgments of the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Anr. 2014 (8) SCC 273, Mohd. Asfak Alam vs. State of Jharkhand and anr. (2023) 8 SCC 63 and Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation 2026 INSC 115 also safeguard the interest of the applicants.
4. Upon being confronted with the objection raised by the Learned A.G.A., the Learned counsel for the applicants failed to satisfactorily meet the same.
5. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashok Kumar Singh, G.A. Rajbir Singh Tyagi And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
case, it would be appropriate to dispose of the present application with a direction to the Investigating Officer to strictly comply with the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra) and Mohd. Asfak Alam (supra) and Satender Kumar Antil (supra) while conducting the investigation in the above mentioned case.
6. This application is accordingly disposed of. September 8, 2026 Kushal NABAIL No. 8220 of 2026 2 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- KUSHAL AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad