Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 100432 (ALL)

SONU AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NABAIL/7946/2025 · 2025-09-24

Vivek Varma

body2025

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. - 7946 of 2025 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by counsel for the applicants and copy of the statement of the doctor produced by Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. are taken on record. 2. Heard counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.147 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 351(3), 109(1) B.N.S., Police Station- Barla, District- Aligarh. 4. Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the first information report, the applicants along with two named co-accused are alleged to have assaulted the informant, his mother and father. As per the case diary, medical reports of the informant and his mother are only available. According to the medical reports, supplementary medical reports as well as statement of the doctor, the injuries sustained by the informant and his mother were simple in nature. It is contended that the nature of the injuries received by the two injured shows that there was no intent to murder. At this stage, there is no credible evidence to link the applicants with the offence. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. Investigation is pending. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest in the above mentioned case. In case the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Upendra Kumar Pushkar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sonu And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Counsel for the applicants further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report. 7. Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicants and the fact that according to the medical reports, supplementary medical reports as well as statement of the doctor, the injuries sustained by the informant and his mother were simple in nature and at this stage, there is no credible evidence to link the applicants with the offence, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled for anticipatory bail till the submission of police report. 8. In the event of arrest, the applicants- Sonu and Shishpal be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 193(3) B.N.S.S., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) 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 to dissuade from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passports, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned. 9. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants. 10. The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this NABAIL No. 7946 of 2025 2 Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicants. 11. The applicants are directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order. 12. The application stands disposed of. September 25, 2025 Manish Kr NABAIL No. 7946 of 2025 3 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad