Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:14987 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 766 of 2025 Applicant :- Janmejay Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shashank Kumar,Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard Sri Shashank Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicant for enlarging him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No 0306 of 2024, under Sections 221, 109(1), 324(3) of BNS and Section 3/5A/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, Police Station Lalganj, District Mirzapur. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive; Applicant has been implicated in the present case being owner of the alleged vehicle. He further submitted that applicant earlier rented his vehicle before four days of the incident to one Abdul Sher, since then the possession of the truck is in his custody, the rent agreement of the truck has been annexed as annexure 3 to the affidavit. Allegation alleged in the FIR is false and baseless. It is submitted that the applicant is apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation. 4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there is direct allegation against the applicant. Applicant is main owner of the alleged truck and he has only rented his truck to one Abdul Sher and from truck, 31 alive cow have been recovered. Involvement of the applicant in the present case cannot be denied. The applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant may be rejected. 5. The object of anticipatory bail is that a person should not be unnecessarily harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy personal vendetta or grudge of complainant or any other person operating the things directly or from behind the curtains. 6. It is well settled that discretionary power conferred by the legislature on this Court cannot be put in a straitjacket formula but such discretionary power either grant or refusal of anticipatory bail has to be exercised carefully in appropriate cases with circumspection on the basis of the available material after evaluating the facts of the particular case and considering other relevant factors (nature and gravity of accusation, role attributed to accused, conduct of accused, criminal antecedents, possibility of the applicant to flee from justice, apprehension of tempering of the witnesses or threat to the complainant, impact of grant of anticipatory bail in investigation or society etc.) with meticulous precision maintaining balance between the conflicting interest, namely, sanctity of individual liberty and interest of society. 7. Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case and considering the submissions advanced, the nature and gravity of the accusation, I find no good ground for anticipatory bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case. 8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. Order Date :- 4.2.2025 Nitin Verma Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad