HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 602 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and Sri Vinod Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant. 2. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order passed on 29.05.2025: "1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party no.1. 2. Issue notice to opposite party no.2. 3. First Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with regard to Case Crime no.151 of 2020, under Section 323, 325, 427, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., P.S. Kurwar, District Sultanpur. 4. As per contents of first information report, the incident is said to have taken place on 15.04.2020 at about 11.30 a.m. when applicant along with co-accused is said to have attacked and inflicted injuries upon informant and his brother. 5. It has been submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in charges levelled against him and that even as per statement of injured, role of applicant is indicated as attacking with stick (lathi). It is submitted that injury report clearly indicates as nature of injury being simple. It is submitted that the present FIR in fact has been filed as retaliation to the FIR which was lodged earlier by the applicant himself against the informant and his family members which was registered as Case Crime No.150 of 2020. It is submitted that the applicant and his family members have also Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjeev Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vinod Kumar Pandey Kazim Ali .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Home Secy. U.P. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) suffered injuries and at this stage instigator of altercation cannot be determined. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed anticipatory bail with submission that statement of injured as well as injury report clearly corroborate complicity of applicant. It is however admitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history. 7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, subject to further evidence being led in trial, it appears that altercation appears to have taken place resulting in injuries on both sides and at this stage instigation of altercation cannot be determined. Charge sheet has already been filed and there is nothing adverse with regard to applicant's cooperation during investigation. The applicant does not have any previous criminal history. Co-accused Zargam Ali has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Criminal Misc Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.414 of 2025. Thus, in view of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, it would be appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C./482 BNNS. 8. List this case in first week of July, 2025 along with service report. 9. Objections may be filed in the meantime. 10. In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, applicant Kazim Ali shall be released on interim anticipatory bail in aforesaid Case Crime number on his/her furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or tamper with the evidence; (ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail; Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed. " ABAIL No. 602 of 2025 2 3. The opposite party no. 2 has filed vakalatnama but has not filed any counter affidavit. 4. The State has also not filed any counter affidavit. 5. In these circumstances, this Court finds no good ground to take a view different from the view taken by a Coordinate bench of this Court on 29.05.2025 granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. 6. In view of above, the interim order dated 29.05.2025 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed. September 15, 2025 Anurag ABAIL No. 602 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench