HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8092 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Mohd. Ashraf, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Uma Shankar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 148 of 2025 under Sections 115 (2), 352, 351 (2), 117 (2), 109 (1) of B.N.S., Police Station Devarniyan, District Bareilly with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have an apprehension that they may be arrested in the above-mentioned case. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that initially the FIR was lodged under sections 115 (2), 352 and 351 (2) BNS but during investigation, sections 117 (2) and 109 (1) BNS have been added. It is further submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case as no specific role has been assigned to them either in the FIR or in the statement of the injured persons. It is also submitted that the applicants are having no criminal history and they undertake to cooperate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It is lastly submitted that in case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and they will cooperate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Ashraf Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Nasim Khan And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) anticipatory bail and submitted that injured Salim has received grievous injuries as fracture has been found on his temporal and parietal bones. 5. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. As per the FIR, the allegation is that the applicants along with two other persons are indulged in assaulting the informant side in which two persons namely Salim and Nadeem received injuries on their person. Injury of Salim is grievous in nature as there are fracture in his temporal and parietal bones, however, the said injuries are not described as dangerous to life by the doctor. Injury of the second injured Nadeem is simple in nature. No specific role has been assigned to the applicants either in the FIR or in the statement of the injured persons Salim and Nadeem and they have no criminal history to their credit. 7. 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 the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 8. 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 applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 9. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 10. In the event of arrest of the applicants Nasim Khan and Alishan Khan involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on their 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 :- NABAIL No. 8092 of 2025 2 (i) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence and that they would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicants would cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicants shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 11. 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 applicants. October 7, 2025 Madhurima NABAIL No. 8092 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad