Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:4753 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 11964 of 2024 Applicant :- Sunder And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Mishra,Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Dhiraj Kumar Pandey,G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants; counsel for the informant; A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicants for enlarging them on bail in Case Crime No.455 of 2024, under Sections 109, 352, 351(3) B.N.S., P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Saharanpur, during the pendency of the trial. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case; Due to prior enmity, instant F.I.R. has been lodged. On perusal of contents of F.I.R. as well as medical examination report, no offence under Section 109 B.N.S. is made out. All the allegations are false and baseless and are not supporting the prosecution case. The applicant has no criminal history. It is next submitted that the applicant's case is squarely covered under Section 482 B.N.S.S. 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. 4. Learned A.G.A. and counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that prima facie offence against the applicants is made out. The prosecution case is supported by medical examination report and injured has received grievous injuries. It is not a case of false implication. The applicants are not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant may be rejected. 5. In Satpal Singh vs. State of Punjab (2018) 13 SCC 813, the Supreme Court has held that the satisfaction of the court for granting protection under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is different from the one under Section 439 Cr.P.C. while considering regular bail. In Pratibha Manchanda and another Vs. State of Haryana and another (2023) 8 SCC 181, the Apex Court has opined that the relief of anticipatory bail is aimed at safeguarding individual rights. While it serves as a crucial tool to prevent the misuse of the power of arrest and protects innocent individuals from harassment, it also presents challenges in maintaining a delicate balance between individual rights and the interests of justice. The tight rope we must walk lies in striking a balance between safeguarding individual rights and protecting public interest. 6. Considered the argument raised by counsel for the applicants and perused the record. No interference is warranted by this Court. The present anticipatory bail application is hereby found devoid of merits and is accordingly rejected. 7. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of anticipatory bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 9.1.2025 Meenu Singh Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad