HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8209 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Shri Dwijendra Prasad, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the first informant, Shri B.P. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no.298 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 131, 352, 351(2), 110 of BNS, Police Station Eka, District Firozabad, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that there is a cross case to the present case. It is further submitted that as per allegation in the first information report, no specific role has been assigned to any of the applicant and only general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicants. It is further submitted that four persons are said to have received injuries but except one injury of Manju Devi, rests of the injures are simple in nature. It is further submitted that the applicant no.3 is having criminal history of one case, which has been explained in the memo of application. It was also submitted that applicants undertake to co-operate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dwijendra Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rajendra Kumar Srivastava Smt. Rubi Devi And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Through Principal Secretary Home Gov. Of U.P. At Lucknow .....Opposite Party(s) 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. have opposed the application for anticipatory bail and submitted that the injuries suffered by the injured Manju Devi is grievous in nature. 5. There is a cross case to the present case and as per allegation in the first information report, no specific role has been assigned to any of the applicant and only general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicants. It is further submitted that four persons are said to have received injuries but except one injury of Manju Devi, rests of the injures are simple in nature. It is further submitted that the applicant no.3 is having criminal history of one case, which has been explained in the memo of application. 6. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 7. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 8. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 9. In the event of arrest of the applicants - Smt. Rubi Devi, Gabbar Singh, Chandra Kant and Anar Singh, involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions :- (i) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence and that they would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (ii) The applicants 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; NABAIL No. 8209 of 2025 2 (iii) The applicants would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicants shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 10. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants. October 30, 2025 RKM NABAIL No. 8209 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad