HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1160 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1.The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.4061 of 2008 under section 326 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Sadar, district Unnao. 2.Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. Notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order. 3.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially, the applicant was enlarged on bail in the same case crime under sections 323, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C. vide order dated 8.9.2008, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Unnao, although the first information report was registered under section 395 I.P.C.. Later on, offence under section 326 I.P.C. has also been added. It is submitted that no case under section 326 I.P.C. is made out. In the medico legal examination, no injury to attract provisions of section 326 I.P.C. has been found. 4.Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application. 5.A perusal of the medico legal examination of the injured shows that he has received following injuries : "1.Lacerated wound 2cmx0.5cm x muscle deep on inner aspect lower lip opposite medial & lower incisor of lower jaw on both side, swelling in size of 4cm x 2 cm on lower lip present, tooth loose in socket. Medial incisor on it side missing. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gulam Mustafa Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Praveen Kumar Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 2. C/o pain both shoulder both hand & lt. knee but no externally visible injury seen. In the x-ray, teeth were found missing. 6.I have also taken note of the fact that while rejecting the anticipatory bail application, the trial court has found that the applicant has not cooperated in the trial and he is absconding since 25.11.2008. Relevant part of the rejection order is extracted below : "A perusal of record transpires that after investigation of the case, charge sheet has been submitted and cognizance has been taken by the concerned Magistrate vide order dated 25.11.2008. Several processes have been issued to ensure the presence of accused/applicant in the court but accused did not turn up. It transpires that accused/applicant is not cooperating in trial and remain absconded for more than 16 years. There is no anticipation of his being arrested without any cogent reason. Accused/applicant is expected to appear before the court concerned and apply for regular bail. In the facts and circumstances of the case, he is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application is liable to be rejected." 7.In view of the fact that for the last 16 years, the applicant has not cooperated in the trial and has been absconding, I find no illegality in the impugned rejection order dated 13.5.2025. The anticipatory bail being an exceptional jurisdiction cannot be exercised in the given facts of the present case. 8.The application is dismissed. October 16, 2025 kkb/ ABAIL No. 1160 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench