HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1488 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State as well as Shri Santosh Kumar, learned Advocate who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant which is taken on record. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.241 of 2025, under Sections 191(2)/115(2)/352/351(2)/109 B.N.S., registered at Police Station Mailani, District Lakhimpur Kheri. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant submit that co- accused Pushpa Devi and another had filed an anticipatory bail application, which was rejected by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. 1181 of 2025. It is contended that the role assigned to the present applicant is identical to that of the said co-accused. While rejecting the anticipatory bail application, the Coordinate Bench has already examined the merits of the case. Learned counsel for the applicant, however, submits that while rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the co-accused persons, the Coordinate Bench did not consider the cross FIR lodged in the present matter. Perused the record. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Alok Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ashish Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another .....Opposite Party(s) A perusal of the order dated 10.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. 1181 of 2025 shows that the Coordinate Bench, while rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the co-accused persons, has taken into consideration the fracture sustained by the injured, the CT scan report, and the statement of the injured. The relevant portion of the order reads as under: "2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.241 of 2025, under Sections 191(2)/115(2)/352/351(2)/109 B.N.S., registered at Police Station Mailani, District Lakhimpur Kheri. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 08.06.2025 against six persons including the applicants stating that because of an old animosity all the accused persons had assaulted the informant's wife and daughter causing serious injuries to them. 4. The CT examination of one of the injured woman mentions a fracture on right frontal bone. In the statement of injured Vimla Devi she stated that all the accused persons had assaulted her and her daughter was taken to Community Health Centre, Gola from where she was referred to District Hospital, Lakhimpur Kheri and she had to remain admitted in a hospital for four days. 5. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of allegations and the injuries suffered by two women in the present case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts do not warrant exercise of discretion of this court by granting pre-arrest bail to the applicants. 6. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is dismissed. However, in case the applicants appear before the learned trial court and seek their release on regular bail, their bail applications shall be considered in accordance with law without being influenced by rejection of their anticipatory bail application by this court." The mere fact that a cross FIR was lodged by the accused side, which was not considered by the Coordinate Bench, would not make any difference in the present case, as the applicant has also been assigned a similar role. This Bench cannot take a different view from that already taken by the Coordinate Bench. NABAIL No. 1488 of 2025 2 Accordingly, in view of the reasons recorded while rejecting the anticipatory bail application of co-accused Pushpa Devi and another, the injury report, the statement of the injured, and the similar role assigned to the present applicant, I do not find any ground to take a different view. Hence, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. October 13, 2025 R.C. NABAIL No. 1488 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench