Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:6196 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11830 of 2024 Applicant :- Nakul Alias Nakul Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Mishra,Rishabh Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard Sri Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, 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 Criminal Case No 38994 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No.14 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Noorpur, District Bijnor. 3. Allegation alleged in the FIR is that applicant was called by one co-accused, Ashutosh, to have tea in a hotel when they went to hotel, there applicant, three named accused and 2-3 unknown persons were present there and all of them started maar peet with informant, hence, the present FIR. 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; On perusal of injury report and statement of witnesses, no offence is made out against the applicant. Investigating Officer has submitted charge sheet. 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. Injured has received grievous injuries on account of maar peet by applicant and other co-accused persons, as such, applicant's involvement in the present case cannot be denied. Charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant in the aforesaid sections. 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 :- 15.1.2025 Nitin Verma Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad