HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7601 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1.Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicants is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Ram Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri R.K. Singh, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Yogendra Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Complaint Case no. 137 of 2022 under Sections 149, 307 IPC, Police Station Highway, District Mathura with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail. 4. It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that earlier, on same set of facts, a case was lodged under sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 307, 504, 506 IPC but after investigation, section 307 IPC was not made out against the applicants and they were enlarged on bail. It is further submitted that on same set of facts a complaint has been filed in which the applicants have been summoned to face trial under sections 149 and 307 IPC. It is further submitted that injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature. It is also submitted that criminal history of the applicants has been duly explained in the memo of application as well as in the supplementary affidavit filed today. It was also submitted that applicants undertake to co-operate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court and in case they are granted Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ramesh Kumar Singh Bhikko And 5 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant as well as as learned A.G.A. opposed the application for anticipatory bail and submit that two persons have received injuries on face as well as on chest. However, they did not dispute the fact that the said injuries are not dangerous to life. 6. In reply to the above, learned counsel for the applicants submits that there is general and omnibus allegation of opening fire on all the accused persons. 7. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 8. Earlier, a case was registered by the complainant against the applicants under sections 307 and other sections of the IPC, however, after investigation, section 307 IPC was not made out against the applicants and they were enlarged on bail in the said case. There is also a cross case to the said case. Subsequently, a complaint case has been filed against the applicants in which they have been summoned to face trial under sections 149 and 307 IPC. There are general and omnibus allegations in the complaint that they opened fire on the persons of the complainant side wherein two nieces of the complainant received injuries on their face and chest, however, the injuries are simple in nature. Criminal history of the applicants has been duly explained in the memo of application as well as in the supplementary affidavit filed today. 9. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, the Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedents of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must also evaluate the entire available material against the accused carefully and the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 10. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding NABAIL No. 7601 of 2025 2 anticipatory bail, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 11. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 12. In the event of arrest of the applicants Bhikko, Hariom, Kanhaiya, Maluka @ Naresh, Shankar and Bhura involved in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions :- (i) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence and that they would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (ii) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicants would cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicants shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 13. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants. October 13, 2025 Madhurima NABAIL No. 7601 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad