HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7947 of 2025 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri Nagendra Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the material placed on record. 2. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 151 of 2025, under Sections 318(2), 318(4), 112(2) of B.N.S. and Sections 11, 3, 4, 10 of Public Examination Act, Police Station- Sarai Inayat, District- Prayagraj. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Suraj Singh Maurya in police custody. The said statement, insofar as it implicates the applicant is unreliable. As per the statement of co-accused Suraj Singh Maurya, the answers of the alleged question paper were sent through whatsapp on his mobile number by the applicant having mobile No.7238045709. It is contended that the alleged Mobile No.7238045709 does not belong to the applicant. In this regard, reliance has been placed on the CAF report, annexed a Annexure-7 to the bail application. It is further contended that the applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. At this stage, there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Investigation is pending. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. In case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ayush Mishra, Prabha Shanker Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Kaushlesh Kumar Yadav Urf Baccha Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Counsel for the applicant further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report. 6. Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant and the fact that the applicant was not named in the first information report; the name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Suraj Singh Maurya in police custody; as per the CAF report the alleged mobile number from which whatsapp messages were sent relate to another person; at this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail till the submission of police report. 7. In the event of arrest, the applicant- Kaushlesh Kumar Yadav Urf Baccha Yadav 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 applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him, before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned. 8. 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 applicant. 9. 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. 7947 of 2025 2 Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant. 10. The applicant is 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. 11. The application stands disposed of. September 25, 2025 Manish Kr NABAIL No. 7947 of 2025 3 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad