Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:1969 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 11834 of 2024 Applicant :- Saddam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Omar Zamin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Nasiruzzaman Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard Sri Omar Zamin, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Nasiruzzaman, learned counsel for the informant, 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 278 of 2024, under Sections 89, 90, 91, 238, 239, 3(5) of BNS and Section 15(3) of Indian Medical Council Act, Police Station Jevar, District Gautam Budh Nagar. 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; FIR has been lodged in regard to missing of informant's mother and the FIR has been lodged after about 11 days of the incident. Investigating Officer has not collected any evidence in regard to commission of offence and there is no evidence to implicate the applicant in the present case. Investigating Officer has submitted charge sheet against four accuse persons. Investigation proceeding is going on. On perusal of statement of prosecution witnesses, prima facie, no involvement of applicant is found in the present case. Applicant should not be sent jail as there is no evidence against the applicant. Applicant has no previous criminal history. 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 counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and have submitted that there is direct allegation against the applicant. On perusal of statement of witnesses, prima facie offence is made out against the applicant. Applicant has complicity in the present case which cannot be denied and skeleton of deceased-Mobina, has been recovered after about ten days of the incident. 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 :- 6.1.2025 Nitin Verma Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad