HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 930 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Lalji Yadav, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rao Narendra Singh, learned A.G.A-I appearing on behalf of the State as well as Sri Ajay Veer Singh, Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of the informant and filed his vakalatnama, which is taken on record. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No. 70 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 427, 352, 308 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Sangipur, District Pratapgarh. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 06.03.2022 against seven persons, including the applicant and two unknown persons, stating that because of an old animosity between the parties, all the accused persons, armed with weapons, fire arms, sticks and sharp edge weapons, attacked the informant at about 6:00 pm on 05.03.2022 and when the informant's parents tried to intervene, they were also beaten up, the nose ring of the informant's mother was snatched away because of which the informant's nose got cut. Although, the medico-legal examination report of the injured person mentions several injuries, there is no such injury on her nose which may support this allegation levelled in the F.I.R. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail application it has been contended that the applicant is innocent, she has falsely been implicated in the present case and she has no previous criminal history. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Puttu Lal Misra, Prince Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt. Chandrawati .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. It is stated in the First Information Report that the informant is an advocate and he has levelled false allegations of snatching away of nose ring and causing a cut injury in the nose, which allegation is not supported by the medico-legal examination report, which makes the F.I.R version unreliable. It has also been submitted on behalf of the applicant that co- accused Ankit @ Anikut Kumar Jaiswal has already been granted anticipatory bail by this court by means of an order dated 24.08.2023, passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.1876 of 2023. 6. The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. The learned counsel for the complainant has also opposed the anticipatory bail application and he has submitted that non-bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant and yet she has not appeared before the trial court. 7. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that no non- bailable warrant has been served upon the applicant and upon coming to know about the case the applicant has filed the instant anticipatory bail application. 8. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that a co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail in the present case coupled with the fact that the applicant is a woman having no previous criminal history and without making any observations which may affect the outcome of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant also. 9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant-Smt. Chandrawati before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, she shall be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of S.H.O./Court concerned on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court: (i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 ABAIL No. 930 of 2025 2 to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court' (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. August 27, 2025 Ram. ABAIL No. 930 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench