Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1506 of 2025 Applicant :- Wasim Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan,Tanveer Zafar Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vivek Singh Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 526 of 2024 under Sections 191(2), 190, 352 and 109 of B.N.S. 2023 Police Station Teela Mod, District-Ghaziabad during the pendency of trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that applicant is named in the F.I.R and allegation of firing upon brother of the informant namely, Mehraj is levelled against him. Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that applicant has not participated in any of the events alleged in the F.I.R. as he was not on the spot and the allegations levelled against him are not supported by any evidence and injured has received simple injuries and fire arm injury is not on vital part. He lastly submits that Investigating Officer has submitted chargesheet and in case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant is named in the F.I.R. and role of firing is assigned to the applicant. He further submits that the applicant has criminal history of five cases against him and he not disclosed the same with intention to conceal the criminal history as such, prima facie offence is made out against the applicant. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant may be rejected. 5. The object of Anticipatory bail is that a person should not be unnecessarily harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy personal vendetta or grudge of complainant or any other person operating the things directly or from behind the curtains. 6. It is well settled that discretionary power conferred by the legislature on this Court cannot be put in a straitjacket formula but such discretionary power either grant or refusal of anticipatory bail has to be exercised carefully in appropriate cases with circumspection on the basis of the available material after evaluating the facts of the particular case and considering other relevant factors (nature and gravity of accusation, role attributed to accused, conduct of accused, criminal antecedents, possibility of the applicant to flee from justice, apprehension of tempering of the witnesses or threat to the complainant, impact of grant of anticipatory bail in investigation or society etc.) with meticulous precision maintaining balance between the conflicting interest, namely, sanctity of individual liberty and interest of society. 7. Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case and considering the submissions advanced, the nature and gravity of the accusation, I find no good ground for anticipatory bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case. 8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. Order Date :- 7.3.2025 SY Digitally signed by :- SWETA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad