Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:34698 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1923 of 2025 Applicant :- Lokendra Pratap Singh And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicants for enlarging them on bail in Case Crime No.80 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 341, 332, 352, 353, 188, 504 I.P.C. & 7 Criminal Law (Amendmente) Act & 2/3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act & Section 3 Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, Police Station Sakrauli, District Etah. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The whole prosecution story is false and baseless. The applicants have no criminal history. It is next submitted that the applicants' case is squarely covered under section 482 BNSS. It is submitted that the applicants are apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation. 4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that prima-facie offence against the applicants is made out. The applicants have criminal history which they have not explained in the affidavit of anticipatory bail application. Applicants have concealed the fact that they have criminal history. The applicants are not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants may be rejected. 5. The object of Section 482 BNSS 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 of the applicants- Lokendra Pratap Singh, Reshampal, Sunil Kumar, Devaki Nandan, Harisharanm alias Harsh Sharanm, Mahesh & Prempal Singh, involved in aforesaid case crime is, hereby, rejected. 9. Considering the aforesaid alternative prayer of the applicants, it is directed that if applicants surrender before the concerned court below within three weeks from today and apply for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law. 10. For the period of three weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicants before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them. Order Date :- 10.3.2025 SKD Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad