Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19723 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1051 of 2025 Applicant :- Sumit @ Billu And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Aslam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicants for enlarging them on bail in Case Crime No 385 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 191(2), 191(3), 109, 117(2), 190 B.N.S., Police Station Rampur Maniharan, District Saharanpur. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. Allegation in the FIR is that named accused persons assaulted the informant and other person with lathi, danda, talwar, Iron rod and saria. Except fracture all injuries are simple in nature. It is submitted that the applicants are apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation. 5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that applicants are named in the FIR and victim has supported the prosecution story. Role has assigned to the applicants for causing injury to the injured. It is not a case of false implication. The applicants are not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants may be rejected. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. 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 applicants in the aforesaid case. 9. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants- Sumit @ Billu & Pankaj @ Neetu, involved in aforesaid case crime is, hereby, rejected. 10. Considering the aforesaid alternative prayer of the applicant, it is directed that if applicants surrender before the concerned court below within two weeks from today and apply for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law. 11. For the period of two weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicants before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them. Order Date :- 11.2.2025 SKD Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad