Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:38734 Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 826 of 2025 Applicant :- Sirajuddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Harpreet Singh,Mo.Jeeshan Ali Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and the learned AGA. and perused record. 2. The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC/ 482 BNSS has been preferred for grant of anticipatory bail as the accused applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Case Crime No.0025 of 2025, Under Section 105 B.N.S, Police Station Madhoganj, District - hardoi. 3. The brief facts of the case are that an F.I.R. dated 31.01.2025 has been lodged under Section 105 BNS, against the applicant alleging therein that the applicant had given medicine and after consuming the same the condition of the husband of the informant / deceased deteriorated, due to which he died. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is neither a doctor nor practicing as a doctor in the village, his son has a medicine shop and the informant came there and asked for some medicine for cold but the applicant advised her to take her husband to the Primary Health Centre as his condition is not good. 5. It is further submitted that the husband of the applicant had died in Primary Health Centre and as per the postmortem report, the immediate cause of death is 'CARDIORESPIRATORY FAILURE, AS A RESULT OF MYOCARDIAL INFARRCTION'. 6. It is further submitted that an affidavit has also been given by the complainant / informant to the Superintendent of Police, District - Hardoi, stating therein that the applicant after seeing the condition of the deceased refused to prescribe any medicine and thereafter the complainant took her husband to the primary health centre, where he died. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case just to tarnish the image of applicant in the society. It is further submitted that the applicant is apprehending his arrest in near future. 8. It has further been submitted that the nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused has not properly comprehended. It is further contended that the applicant has not previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence and there is no possibility of applicant to flee from the judicial proceedings. The applicant undertakes that if enlarged on bail, he will never misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the Investigation. 9. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. on the basis of instructions received has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail buť unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant 10. As per the judgment in the case of Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth Vs. State of Gujarat reported in MANU/SC/0949/2015, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused must be properly comprehended, the previous criminal antecedents of the applicant whether he has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction. the possibility of applicant to flee and where the accusation has been made only with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him. 11. After considering the rival submissions of the respective parties and perusal of the record, it is found that there is a case lodged against the applicant and it cannot be definitely said when the police may apprehend the applicant. After the lodging of FIR the arrest can be made by the police at any time. Nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused has not been properly comprehended; the applicant has not previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by the Court; as undertaken by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is no possibility to flee from the Judicial proceedings and in the light of judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in case of Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth (Supra), this Court finds it a fit case to issue an interim order of anticipatory bail. 12. 12. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. 13. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 14. In the event of arrest, let the accused-applicant, Sirajuddin be released forthwith in the aforesaid Case Crime Number on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting officer/Investigating Officer/ S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (ii) 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall co-operate in the investigation. In case there is breach of any of the above conditions or in case it is otherwise found for any other reason the bail is required to be cancelled, it shall be open for the State or the appropriate authority to move application for cancellation bail in accordance with law. Order Date :- 8.7.2025 S. Kumar Digitally signed by :- SANTOSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench