Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19021 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1035 of 2025 Applicant :- Shabina Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Shankar Kaithal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard 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 bail in Case Crime No 52 of 2024, under Sections 379, 411, 413, 414, 420 I.P.C., Police Station Sahar, District Auraiya. 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 is not named in the F.I.R. His name surfaced in the statement of co-accused and from co- accused, three stolen motor cars parts have been recovered. Applicant is a lady having no concern with the alleged incident. It is submitted that the applicant is apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she 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 co-accused has disclosed the applicant's name and applicant having three cases of criminal history. Custodian interrogation is required for fair investigation. 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 Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 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 of the applicant- Shabina, involved in aforesaid case crime is, hereby, rejected. 9. Considering the aforesaid alternative prayer of the applicant, it is directed that if applicant surrenders before the concerned court below within two weeks from today and applies for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law. 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 her. Order Date :- 10.2.2025 SKD Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad