HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1718 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard Shri Shiv Prakash Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Rajeev Verma, learned A.G.A for the State. 2. The present application for anticipatory bail has been filed for protection in regard to Case Crime No. 109 of 2025, under sections 191(2), 191(3), 109(1), 351(3), 190 of B.N.S and Section 3/25/27 of Arms Act, P.S. Munshiganj, District Amethi. 3. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is a case of no injury. 4. Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and, by referring to the case diary, submits that the applicant has criminal history of 15 cases, out of those, two cases pertain to an offence under Section 307 I.P.C, hence, it is not a case of false implication and no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. 5. Upon due consideration to the fact that the allegation against the applicant is that the applicant, along with co-accused persons purchased some goods from the shop of one Rajendra Kumar Agrahari, however, when the money was demanded, they hurled abuses and fired with country made pistol, however, no one was injured. During investigation, it appears that in the statement of the co-accused, the name of the applicant has surfaced, the other prosecution witness have also alleged the complicity of the applicant, as also the fact that the applicant appears to be absconding from the investigation, so also the fact that the applicant has criminal history of 15 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arti Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Abhay Pratap Singh @ Golu Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) cases, out of those, two cases are under Section 307 I.P.C, considering, the complicity of the applicant, and also in view of the long and chequered criminal history of the applicant,, it cannot be said that it is a case of false implication, I do not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. 6. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail stands rejected. November 17, 2025 DiVYa NABAIL No. 1718 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench