Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:14505 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 134 of 2025 Applicant :- Bahadur Singh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Gaur 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.756 of 2024, under Sections 121(1) and 132 B.N.S., P.S. Sikandara, District Agra, during pendency of trial. 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 malicious. It is no injury case. The applicants have no criminal history. It is next submitted that the applicants' case is squarely covered under Section 482 B.N.S.S. 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. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that prima facie offence against the applicant is made out. Charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant and the court has neither taken cognizance and nor issued summons. There is no apprehension of arrest of the applicant. The applicants are not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants 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. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegations, gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and applying above stated exposition of law in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, it is apparent that since the charge sheet has been submitted and the court has not taken cognizance and nor issued summons against the applicants, there is no apprehension of arrest of the applicant. No interference is warranted by this Court. 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. Order Date :- 31.1.2025 Meenu Singh Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad