Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:26395 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1514 of 2025 Applicant :- Sanu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Sharan Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jitendra Pal Singh Jadaun Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Shiv Sharan Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jitendra Pal Singh Jadaun, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicant for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No.11 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 109, 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station Sashni Gate, District Aligarh. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Injuries are simple in nature. Allegation alleged in the FIR is false and baseless. It is submitted that the applicant is apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation. 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that two persons have received injuries and injuries are grievous in nature. It is not a case of false implication. Prima-facie offence is made out against the applicant. The applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant 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 applicant in the aforesaid case. 9. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant- Sanu, involved in aforesaid case crime is, hereby, rejected. 10. Considering the aforesaid alternative prayer of the applicant, it is directed that if applicant surrenders before the concerned court below within two weeks from today and applies 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 applicant before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him. Order Date :- 24.2.2025 SKD Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad