HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8142 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Mangala Prasad Rai, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ashok Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Hridaya Lal, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the record. 2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 197 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 351(3), 352, 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station Sukhpura, District Ballia with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. It is contended by the learned Senior counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case. He further submits that no offence is made out against the applicant. It is further submitted that the allegation against the applicant is that he opened fire on the first informant but the said fire did not hit him. It is further submitted that the applicant is having criminal history of two cases, which has been explained in paragraph 16 of the memo of the application. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashok Kumar Rai, Pavan Kumar Pandey, Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Hridaya Lal, Raj Guru Mauraya Abhishek Tiwari Alias Monu Tiwari .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the first informant has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submitted that though the fire did not hit the first informant but the other co-accused persons inflicted incised wound of 4cm x 2cm on the skull of the first informant by knife. It is submitted that the applicant was having common intention with other co-accused to commit the offence of attempt to murder. 5. Learned A.G.A. has also opposed the application for anticipatory bail and submitted that case crime numbers explained by the applicant in his memo of application are different from the case crime numbers as per his instructions. It is also submitted that the applicant is having criminal history of two cases, which are triable by the Magistrate. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. As per first information report, the allegation against the applicant is that he opened the fire but the said fire did not hit the first informant. The other two co-accused persons namely Ram Prakash Tiwari and Chandan Singh caused incised wound on the scar of the first informant measuring 4cm x 2 cm by their knife. The applicant is having criminal history of two cases, which has been explained in the memo of application. 8. 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, 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. 9. 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, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 10. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. NABAIL No. 8142 of 2025 2 11. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Abhishek Tiwari @ Monu Tiwari involved in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his 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 applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (ii) The applicant 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 applicant would cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 12. 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 applicant herein. October 14, 2025 Abhishek NABAIL No. 8142 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad