HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1549 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed in Case Crime/FIR No. 005 of 2025, under Sections 91, 115(2), 352, 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Rahimabad, District Lucknow. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that cross FIRs have been lodged by both sides in respect of the same incident. It is further submitted that two persons from the applicant’s side have sustained injuries, whereas only one person is injured from the complainant’s side. He contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that the injured in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has assigned a specific role to the present applicant alleging that he kicked her on the abdomen, as a result of which she suffered excessive bleeding and pain. It is further submitted that at the time of the incident, the injured was two months pregnant and suffered a miscarriage. The statement of the injured is corroborated by the injury report. Considering the specific allegations against the applicant and the admitted occurrence of the incident resulting in cross cases, it is submitted that no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shiv Shankar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vikash Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko .....Opposite Party(s) Perused the record. Anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy, intended to be exercised only in exceptional circumstances, where the Court is satisfied that the applicant has been falsely implicated or where no material exists to justify custodial interrogation. In the present case, considering the nature of injjyr and the specific role of causing injury assigned to the present applicant and the seriousness of the offence, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for exercising the discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the applicant. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. October 17, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S NABAIL No. 1549 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench