Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:84217 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3746 of 2025 Applicant :- Chakresh Shinki And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Ashish Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Sri Deepak Gaur, learned counsel has filed his power on behalf of the informant today in the Court, which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.76 of 2025 under Section 105 B.N.S., Police Station Ekdil, District Etawah, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail. 4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have an apprehension that they may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. Learned counsel further argued that there is no eye-witness of the alleged incident and that as per post mortem report, there is no external or internal injury sustained by the deceased. It has also been argued that the cause of death is due to cardiac arrest and therefore the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that no coercive process has been issued against the applicants so far. It was also submitted that applicants undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the application for anticipatory bail. 6. It may 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. 7. 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, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 8. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 9. In the event of arrest of the applicants-Chakresh (Shinki), Rakesh (Rinku) and Naveen (Navees) involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail till submission of police report on their 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 the following conditions :- (i) the applicants shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) the applicants 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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) the applicants would co-operate during investigation and trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. 10. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants. Order Date :- 20.5.2025 S.Ali Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad