HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8528 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 144 of 2020, under Sections 186, 386, 504, 506, 188, 269, 270 I.P.C. and Section 3 of Epidemic Act, 1897, Police Station Kotwali, District Saharanpur, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that this is the second anticipatory bail application moved on behalf of applicants. Their first anticipatory bail application was rejected by this Court on 15.07.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2242 of 2025. He further submits that there is no credible evidence against the applicants. It has also been submitted that applicants have no criminal antecedents and applicants undertake to cooperate during the trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 3. The present crime relates to the year 2020. The charge sheet has already been filed against the applicants in which clinching and credible evidence were found against them. When this Court asked the learned counsel for the applicant to show to whether applicants are appearing before the concerned trial court, the learned counsel for the applicants failed to demonstrate anything regarding their appearance before the trial court. 4. In the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akash Garg Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Gulafsha Ansari And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 5. 5. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the present crime relates to the year 2020 and the learned counsel for the applicant has failed to show as to whether applicants are appearing before the trial court and moreover, learned counsel for the applicant has failed to show any fresh ground to entertain the present anticipatory bail application, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, no case for anticipatory bail is made out. 6. The anticipatory bail application is rejected. October 17, 2025 Mustaqeem. NABAIL No. 8528 of 2025 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad