Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:36477 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2040 of 2025 Applicant :- Kanwarpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhiraj Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. 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 with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No.698 of 2021, under Sections 452, 323, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Deoband, District Saharanpur, during 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. The applicant and informant are of the same village. It is a no injury case. The charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant. The summoning order passed by the learned Magistrate is without application of judicial mind. Instant case is squarely covered under section 482 B.N.S.S. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would co-operate with the investigation. Applicant has definite apprehension of his arrest by the police. 4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that prima facie offence against the applicant is made out. The applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant may be rejected. 5. In Satpal Singh vs. State of Punjab (2018) 13 SCC 813, the Supreme Court has held that the satisfaction of the court for granting protection under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is different from the one under Section 439 Cr.P.C. while considering regular bail. In Pratibha Manchanda and another Vs. State of Haryana and another (2023) 8 SCC 181, the Apex Court has opined that the relief of anticipatory bail is aimed at safeguarding individual rights. While it serves as a crucial tool to prevent the misuse of the power of arrest and protects innocent individuals from harassment, it also presents challenges in maintaining a delicate balance between individual rights and the interests of justice. The tight rope we must walk lies in striking a balance between safeguarding individual rights and protecting public interest. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the arguments tendered at bar pertain to regular bail application and cannot be agitated at the stage of 482 B.N.S.S., I do not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. The present anticipatory bail application is hereby found devoid of merits and is accordingly rejected. 8. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of anticipatory bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. 9. However, if the applicant surrenders before the concerned court within three weeks from today and applies for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the court concerned, in accordance with law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922. 10. For the period of three 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 the applicant. Order Date :- 12.3.2025 Meenu Singh Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad