Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48007 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 893 of 2025 Applicant :- Durgesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Bajpai,Abhay Nath Mishra,Abhishek Kumar,Belal Ahmad,Chandra Prakash Tripathi,Priyanka Singh,Satyendra Kumar Gupta,Surendra Prasad Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri. Ashok Kumar Bajpai, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Mohd. Asif Khan, learned A.G.A.-I appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No. 402 of 2011, under Section 307, 504 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Jasinghpur, District Sultanpur. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 05.08.2011 against four persons, including the applicant, stating that while the informant's father had gone to attend call of nature near a pond at about 7 PM, the accused persons came there riding on a motorcycle and started firing towards the informant's father. 4. After investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted a closure report stating that the victim had self inflicted the injuries to put pressure on the accused persons so as to make him enter into a settlement in an old dispute between the parties. 5. The complainant filed a protest application, which was registered as a complaint. The complainant supported the F.I.R version in his statement recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. The victim also supported the F.I.R version in his statement recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C and he stated that on the exhortation of the applicant and two other co-accused persons, the third co-accused Hafeez had fired gun shots towards him due to which he suffered injuries on left shoulder, Chest and left arm. An eye-witness Sheetala Sahai has also supported the version of the victim. 6. The doctor, who had examined the victim has stated before the trial court that the injures inflicted on the victim's body could have been fatal. 7. Having gone through the aforesaid material, I am of that view that the present case does not warrant exercise of discretion of this Court by granting pre arrest bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application stands rejected. However, in case the applicant appears before the trial court and seeks his release on bail, his bail application shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law without being influenced by rejection of this anticipatory bail application. . (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 18.8.2025 Preeti. Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench