HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2340 of 2025 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Case called out. Counsel for the informant is not present. On 03.09.2025 also, the counsel for the informant was not present. 2. Heard counsel for the applicants as well as Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. 3. The present application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants in Case Crime No. 81 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 351(3) BNS, Police Station Kotwali, District- Maharajganj. 4. Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the instant case. Criminal history of the applicants have been explained in paragraph nos. 4 and 5 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest in the above mentioned case. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the investigation is pending in the matter. A prima facie case is made out. Referring to the provisions of Section 35 of B.N.S.S. it is submitted that since offences levelled in the first information report are punishable up to seven years only the applicants cannot be arrested. An apprehension of arrest shown in the anticipatory bail is not genuine. Thus prayer has been made for rejection of anticipatory bail. 6. I have considered the rival submissions raised by learned counsel for the parties. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudhir Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ramesh Prajapati Sushil Nigam And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 7. In the matter, it is evident from the record that anticipatory bail has been moved for the offences in which the maximum punishment is of seven years. There is a specific provision under Section 35 of B.N.S.S. on point of arrest of the accused relating to the offences punishable up to seven years. Until and unless the mandate given in Section 35 of B.N.S.S. is complied by the Investigating Officer, accused of such offences cannot be arrested. 8. Thus keeping in view of the statutory provisions on point of arrest of the accused, the Court is of the opinion that there is no need of anticipatory bail as the applicants cannot be arrested without complying with the provision given in Section 35 of B.N.S.S. Specific provisions under Section 35 of B.N.S.S. have been provided giving protection to the accused persons from arrest in offences punishable up to seven years punishment. Thus, prayer made in the present application is refused. 9. With the above observations, the present application stands disposed of. September 10, 2025 Lbm/- NABAIL No. 2340 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad