HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8095 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Counter affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the first informant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Rakesh Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sharda Prashad Mishra, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Chandra Shekhar Saran, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 146 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 351(3), 352, 109(1) B.N.S., Police Station Bidhnoo, District Kanpur Nagar with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above- mentioned case. It is further submitted that the first information report has been lodged under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 351(3), 352 BNS against the against the three named persons and 6-7 unknown persons. It is further submitted that the applicant is named in the first information report. It is submitted that there is no mention of any weapon in the FIR and the injuries of the injured Vineet Pandey are not dangerous to life. It is also submitted that some old civil dispute is existing between the applicant and the first informant. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co- Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rakesh Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Sharda Prasad Mishra, Subhash Chandra Maurya, G.A. Kaviraj Tiwari .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the first informant has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submitted that the applicant is a highly influential person and he is influencing the investigation and the statement of the informant has not been recorded as yet. He further submits that the applicant had earlier approached this Court by concealing various material facts and the said application was withdrawn by him. He further submits that conduct of the applicant is not fair. He lastly submits that there is no civil dispute existing between the parties. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and submitted that victim in his statement under Section 180 BNSS has stated that the applicant assaulted him by danda on his head and the doctor has opined that the blood was oozing out from the head of the informant and he would have died, had he not been treated in time. 7. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 8. As per first information report, allegation against the applicant is that the applicant along with other co-accused persons indulged in assaulting the first informant in which Vineet Pandey received injury but there is no mention of any weapon in the FIR by which the applicant and other accused persons assaulted the said injured person. In the medical report, the injuries are grievous but they are not dangerous to life. The injured in his statement has stated that the applicant assaulted him on his head by danda. 9. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, the Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact NABAIL No. 8095 of 2025 2 role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 10. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 11. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 12. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Kaviraj Tiwari involved in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant would cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 13. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant herein. October 10, 2025 Abhishek NABAIL No. 8095 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad