Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:84495 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3729 of 2025 Applicant :- Krishn Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Preet Pal Singh Rathora and Ms. Priya Saxena, learned counsel for first informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Sessions Trial No. 549 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 349 of 2021 (wrongly mentioned as Case Crime No. 173 of 2023) under Sections 302, 504, 506 B.N.S., Police Station Dataganj, District Budaun, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that a first information report was lodged against four accused persons including the applicant, wherein it has been alleged that on the issue of fencing over the agricultural field, altercation took place in the meantime, the accused Gajendra had shot dead the informant's father. Learned counsel further argued that though the applicant was named in the F.I.R. but his complicity in commission of alleged offence did not surface during the course of investigation as such he was dropped in the charge sheet. He further submits that by the efflux of time, the trial commenced and in the depositions of P.W.1 and P.W.2, the complicity of the applicant was established, thus on an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C., the applicant was summoned to face trial vide order dated 07.07.2023. He further argued that the order dated 07.07.2023 was set aside by this Court vide Judgement and order dated 08.07.2024 passed in Criminal Revision No. 4486 of 2023 (Krishna Pal Singh and another Vs. State of U.P. and another). Learned counsel next submits that the order dated 08.07.2024 was challenged by the informant before Hon'ble Apex Court by way of filing Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 12824 of 2024 and the Hon'ble Apex Court while setting aside the order dated 08.07.2024, restored the trial Court's order dated 07.07.2023. It has also brought to the notice of this Court by learned counsel that Hon'ble Apex Court while setting aside the order 08.07.2024 has also observed that any observations made hereinabove shall not have any bearing on the trial. Learned counsel further argued that the learned trial Court merely on the basis of presumption has held complicity of the applicant when as a matter of fact no specific role of assault by deadly weapon has been assigned to the applicant. It has also been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above- mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. It has further been submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedents and that no coercive process has been issued against the applicant so far. Learned counsel next argued that applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co- operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for first informant have opposed the application for anticipatory bail.Learned counsel further argued that the applicant had earlier filed anticipatory bail before the trial Court which was rejected vide order dated 14.12.2023, thereafter the applicant surrendered before the trial Court and he was remained in jail for about seven months. Learned counsel for the informant next argued that against the applicant N.B.W. has already been issued and that the applicant is not appearing before the trial Court taking undue advantage of multiplicity of the proceedings and therefore the applicant is not entitled to been enlarged on bail. 5. Perusal of the record shows that the Ist anticipatory bail application was rejected by learned trial Court, after its rejection, the applicant surrendered before the trial Court had remained incarcerated for about 7 months. Furthermore, non-bailable- warrant is running against the applicant since long. So far as the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that while setting aside the order 08.07.2024, the Hon'ble Apex Court has also observed that any observations made hereinabove shall not have any bearing on the trial is concerned, that was while restoring the trial Court's order dated 07.07.2023, the Hon'ble Apex Court observation was to the effect that it was only for the disposal of the matter for limited issues pending before it and shall not have any bearing on the trial, thus the arguments of learned counsel for the applicant has no force. It may also be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 6. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, no case for anticipatory bail is made out. 7. The anticipatory bail application is rejected. Order Date :- 20.5.2025 S.Ali Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad