HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1314 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. The present anticipatory bail has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.205 of 1988 under Section 147,149,188,336,332,427,333 I.P.C., Police Station Hazratganj, District Lucknow. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. It is alleged in the prosecution case that on 29.02.1988, the first informant along with other police personnel was present at Vidhan Sabha at about 11:15 A.M., a procession of approximately 150 persons, led by Sri Akshaywar Mal and carrying banners, was approaching Vidhan Sabha from Royal Hotel Crossing. When the first informant attempted to stop them, the crowd allegedly tried to force their way into the Vidhan Sabha premises. It is alleged that the mob began assaulting with kicks, fists, stones, and lathi-danda while raising slogans. In the scuffle, several police personnel are said to have sustained injuries. Some persons from the crowd also allegedly received injuries, and certain vehicles were damaged. It is further alleged that 28 persons, including the applicant, were arrested from the spot and taken to the police station. According to the prosecution, all 28 arrested persons were subsequently shifted to the Police Lines and later released on personal bonds. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the procession was being carried out on 29.02.1988 at about 11:00 a.m. when, all of a sudden, the PAC personnel arrived to stop the protest. As a result of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Santosh Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Kishan Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) the abrupt use of force, one Akshaywar Mal allegedly suffered a serious head injury and subsequently succumbed to the injuries. It is contended that as a counterblast to the said incident, the present FIR has been lodged against 28 named persons along with 100–125 unknown individuals. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the concluding parcha of the investigation was filed on 19.03.1989. The charge- sheet submitted by the CBCID was cancelled by the Superintendent of Police vide order dated 27.06.1995. However, without there being any further evidence, a fresh charge-sheet was filed by adding Section 333 IPC along with other sections only to enhance the gravity of the offence. It is submitted that the allegations in the prosecution case are vague and that the applicant, along with the co-accused, was released immediately on personal bonds. After submission of the charge-sheet, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required. It is further submitted that the applicant came to know about the pendency of the present case only on 21.07.2025; prior to that, to the best of his knowledge, no summons, bailable warrant, or non-bailable warrant had ever been served upon him. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and submits that the proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. have been initiated against the applicant. On due consideration to the facts the applicant has no criminal antecedents; the charge-sheet was filed way back in the year 1995; and the applicant had already been released on personal bond, and further, prima facie, from the perusal of the injury report of the injured persons on record, it appears that except Constable Arvind Kumar, who suffered a fracture in the metacarpal bone, all other injured persons sustained simple injuries. Having regard to the submissions advanced and the aforesaid observations, and considering the overall facts of the matter, the perusal of the record, the circumstance that the applicant was not arrested during investigation, and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial, and in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, and without entering into the merits of the case, this Court finds it appropriate to grant protection to the applicant. ABAIL No. 1314 of 2025 2 In view of the above, it is provided that the applicant shall surrender before the concerned court within 10 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. On such surrender, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial and he will not influence the witnesses.The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. Any other condition which the trial court may deem fit and proper may also be imposed. In case of default, it would be open for the trial court to proceed in accordance with law. The application is allowed accordingly. November 26, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S ABAIL No. 1314 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench