Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22499 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 135 of 2025 Applicant :- Taufeeq Ahmad Actual Name Taufeeque Ahmad Sah And 6 Others Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Sinha,Ram Chandra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajendra Kumar Verma,Rajendra Prasad Mishra Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant in Court is taken on record. Heard Shri Arun Sinha, learned counsel for applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State as well as Shri R.P. Mishra for complainant/ informant and perused the record. This first anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No. 276/2024, under sections 191(2) B.N.S. (147 IPC), 190 B.N.S. (149 IPC), 115(2) B.N.S. (323 IPC), 125 B.N.S. (336, 337, 338 IPC), 352 B.N.S. (504 IPC), 351(3) B.N.S. (506 IPC), 118(1) B.N.S. (324 IPC) & 110 B.N.S. (308 IPC), Police Station Kotwali Ityathok, District Gonda. As per contents of FIR, the incident is said to have taken place on 17.7.2024 when the applicants attacked family members of the informant and inflicted serious injury upon them. It has been submitted that the applicants have falsely been implicated the charges levelled against them, which could be evident from the report that injury report do not corroborate the allegations levelled in the FIR. It has been further submitted that all the injuries suffered are simple in nature. It has been submitted that the applicants have cooperated during the course of investigation where after charge sheet was filed. It has been submitted that all the offences levelled against the applicants are punishable with maximum sentence of 7 years. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed anticipatory bail application with submission that applicants have not appeared before the court concerned as well as non-bailable warrants have been issued. Learned AGA on the basis of instruction, however, admits that the applicants have cooperated during the course of investigation and previous criminal history has already been explained. Learned counsel for the complainant, however, controverted the criminal history of the applicant. The applicants have not disclosed the fact that non-bailable warrants issued against them. He has placed reliance of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Srikant Upadhyay and others Vs. State of Bihar and another passed on 14.3.2024 in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 7940 of 2023, Laves Versus State (NCT of Delhi) passed on 31.08.2012 in Criminal Appeal No. 1331 of 2012 (arising ourt of SLP (Crl.) No. 1961 of 2012) and Serious Fraud Investigation Office Vs. Aditya Sarda passed 9.4.2025 in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 13956 of 2023) Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of the record, it appears that medical report does not corroborate the allegation made in the FIR. The applicants have cooperated during the course of investigation where after charge sheet was filed. Previous criminal history has been explained. It is also evident that non- bailable warrant was issued. All the offences levelled against the applicants are punishable of maximum sentence of 7 years. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the that the liberty of the applicants may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicants- Taufeeq Ahmad, Gurdev @ Faiyyaz Ahmad, Bahar Ali, Mohammad Ahmad, Moid, Arif and Saddam shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid Case Crime number on their furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned with the following conditions:- (1) The applicants shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witnesses. (2) The accused-applicants will remain present as and when the arresting officer/1.O./S.H.O. concerned call (s) for investigation/interrogation. (3) The applicants shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. (4) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this protection. 10. The application stands alowed. Order Date :- 21.4.2025 Muk Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench