Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:79442 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3567 of 2025 Applicant :- Guddu Alias Sumit Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anuj Kumar Gupta,Vinay Kumar Singh Singraur Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Savan Kumar Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State- opposite party no. 1, and Sri Savan Kumar, learned counsel for the informant- opposite party no. 2, and perused the material placed on record. 2. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 254 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 118(2) B.N.S., Police Station Utraon, District Prayagraj. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per the allegations in the first information report, the applicant along with two named accused and an unknown person are alleged to have chopped the right ear of the informant- Brijesh Kumar by teeth and assaulted the cousin of the informant namely Satyam. The informant- Brijesh Kumar was examined by the doctor on 17.11.2024. As per the medical report, injury no. 1 of the informant- Brijesh Kumar was grievous in nature. The duration of the injury was recorded as 2-3 days. It is contended that the duration of the injury shows that the alleged wound was not caused in the said incident. Further, the said injury was although grievous in nature but not dangerous to life and was not caused by any dangerous weapon. Further, the other injured Satyam received injuries which were simple in nature. Vague and general allegations have been levelled against the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused injury no. 1 to the informant. At this stage there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. 4. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant and, in particular, the fact that as per the medical report, injury no. 1 of the informant- Brijesh Kumar was grievous in nature, the duration of the injury was recorded as 2-3 days; the said injury was although grievous in nature but not dangerous to life and the fact that the said injury was not caused by any dangerous weapon; the other injured Satyam received injuries which were simple in nature; vague and general allegations have been levelled against the applicant; the applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused injury no. 1 to the informant; and, at this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report. 7. In the event of arrest, the applicant- Guddu @ Sumit Kumar be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 193 (3) B.N.S.S., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned. 8. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. 9. The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant. 10. The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order. 11. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 SKT/- Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad