Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:32313 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1860 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd Saif Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Bhupendra Kumar Pandey,G.A.,Pradeep Kumar Sahu Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Anurag Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bhupendra Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicant for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No. 29 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 333, 352, 351(2), 109(1) & 110 B.N.S., Police Station Mauaima, District Prayagraj. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Though applicant is named in the FIR but he has not involved in the present case. Allegation alleged in the FIR is false and baseless. Injured has received fracture but there is no evidence in regard to fracture. Injuries are simple in nature. Both the parties received injuries and applicant tried to register complaint/FIR but same has not been registered. Learned counsel for the applicant next submits that three persons have been released on bail. Applicant has one case of criminal history, which he has explained in the supplementary affidavit. It is submitted that the applicant is apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation. 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that applicant is named in the FIR and injured has received grievous injuries. Medical examination report is supporting the prosecution story. It is not a case of false implication. The applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant may be rejected. 6. The object of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 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. 7. 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. 8. Heard learned counsel for both the parties. From the record, it is apparent that injuries received by the injured are grievous in nature. It is not a case of false implication. No interference is warranted. 9. 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. 10. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant- Mohd.Saif, involved in aforesaid case crime is, hereby, rejected. 11. Considering the aforesaid alternative prayer of the applicant, it is directed that if applicant surrenders before the concerned court below within two weeks from today and applies for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law. 12. For the period of two weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him. Order Date :- 6.3.2025 SKD Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad