Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:10839 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 12419 of 2024 Applicant :- Bachauna Alias Israr Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Singh,Virendra Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohammad Khalid,Mumtaz Ahmad Siddiqui Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; 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 bail in Case Crime No.122 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 333, 115 (2), 351(2), 324(4), 76, 309(4) B.N.S., P.S. Kareli, District Prayagraj. 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. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. The statement of injured and other witnesses are not supporting the prosecution case. The whole prosecution story is false and malicious. It is next submitted that co-accused Smt.Sabnam Bano and Smt. Sharmila have been granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 29.11.2024 and applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has no criminal history. It is next submitted that the applicant's case is squarely covered under Section 482 B.N.S.S. 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. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that prima facie offence against the applicant is made out. On account of rivalry, the applicant and other co-accused went to assault the informant and injured persons and one and a half years old baby has received injury. Two persons have also received injury. It is not a case of false implication. The applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant may be rejected. 5. In Satpal Singh vs. State of Punjab (2018) 13 SCC 813, the Supreme Court has held that the satisfaction of the court for granting protection under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is different from the one under Section 439 Cr.P.C. while considering regular bail. In Pratibha Manchanda and another Vs. State of Haryana and another (2023) 8 SCC 181, the Apex Court has opined that the relief of anticipatory bail is aimed at safeguarding individual rights. While it serves as a crucial tool to prevent the misuse of the power of arrest and protects innocent individuals from harassment, it also presents challenges in maintaining a delicate balance between individual rights and the interests of justice. The tight rope we must walk lies in striking a balance between safeguarding individual rights and protecting public interest. 6. Considered the argument raised by counsel for the applicant and perused the record. No interference is warranted by this Court. The co-accused have been granted anticipatory on account of being ladies and the applicant's case is different from the co-accused Smt.Sabnam Bano and Smt. Sharmila. 7. The present anticipatory bail application is hereby found devoid of merits and is accordingly rejected. 8. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of anticipatory bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. 9. However, if the applicant surrenders before the concerned court within two weeks from today and applies for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the court concerned, in accordance with law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922. 10. For the period of two weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. Order Date :- 22.1.2025 Meenu Singh Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad