HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1990 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. Notice to opposite party no.2 is dispensed with in ve of the proposed order. . The accused-applicant seeks anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.185 of 2025 under Section 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(3) and 10-9 BNS 2023, Police Station Wazirganj District Gonda. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated. The role assigned to the applicant is causing injury to Vipin Kumar Dubey. It is submitted that the said injured has not suffered any grievous injury and the case is of false implication. The criminal history of two cases has been explained in paragraphs 14 and 16 of the bail application. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Perusal of the record shows that total seven persons have sustained injuries. Dr. Ashutosh Shukla has stated that the injured persons, namely Vipin Kumar Dubey and Sunil, have sustained grievous injuries. Surendra Mishra has also sustained a fatal injury. In view of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sagar Singh, Shri Ram Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vikki Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) the injury reports of the injured persons, their statements, and the statement of the doctor, the prima facie complicity of the applicant is evident, and it cannot be said to be a case of false implication. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant prays that he may be permitted to not press the anticipatory bail application and that liberty be granted to the applicant to file a regular bail application, which may be considered in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another, SLP (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021. In view of the above, prayer for anticipatory bail is refused and the application is dismissed as not pressed. However, it is provided that in case the applicant files a regular bail application within two weeks from today, the same be decided expeditiously, strictly in view of the law laid down by Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra). December 12, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S NABAIL No. 1990 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench