Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:83226 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3665 of 2025 Applicant :- Anjali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manu Khare Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case No. 1009 of 2024 (State Vs. Anjali), arising out of Case Crime no. 1610 of 2020, under Sections 326-B, 436, 427 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Bulandshahr, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on anticipatory bail. 4. The F.I.R. dated 24.12.2020 was lodged by the informant against the applicant and her mother with the allegation that on 05.12.2020 that on account of dispute of ancestral property the applicant and her mother had thrown the acid on account of the informant and her husband sustained injuries. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there on account of civil disputes between the parties the present F.I.R. has been lodged to give the colour of criminal proceedings. The partition suit between the parties is also pending. As far as CCTV footage of the alleged incident is concerned there is no material available on record. One independent witness, namely, Beena, who is maid servant of the informant, had specifically stated that no one was hurt in the alleged incident. There is no medical evidence on record to show that anyone sustained any injury by acid throwing, as alleged by the informant. Totally false and frivolous allegations have been made against the applicant. The applicant and her mother were also granted bail in the present case. Later, on the application moved by the informant, the court of Sessions has rejected the bail application of the applicant and issued non bailable warrant against her. As to the criminal history, that has been explained. Learned counsel further submits on account of issuance of non bailable warrant against the applicant, there is an apprehension that the applicant may be arrested in the above- mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against her. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to cooperate during trial and she would appear as and when required by the trial Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the proceedings of trial and would obey all conditions of bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 10. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Anjali, involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall attend the court proceedings as and when required. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise or to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) the applicant shall cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. 11. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. 12. However, the trial court is directed to make all possible efforts/ endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously. Order Date :- 19.5.2025 Mustaqeem. Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad