Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:107477 Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4926 of 2025 Applicant :- Pradeep And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Singh Chandel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J. 1.Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. 2.The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicants, namely, Pradeep, Beerpal Singh, Smt. Hemlata and Lokendra in Case Crime No.- 1716 of 2020, under Sections- 323, 368 IPC, Police Station- Sihani Gate , District- Ghaziabad. 3.The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants are disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. At this stage, the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicants involve factual disputes and appraisal of evidence. 4.Earlier applicants were granted anticipatory bail in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 7476 of 2021 for a period of 45 days. 5.They have not surrendered as yet and avoiding appearance before the court. 6. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants at this stage. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. 7. The prayer for quashing the FIR of the aforesaid case is refused. 8. However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicants appear before the court below within 60 days from today and applies for bail/anticipatory bail, their prayer for bail/anticipatory bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. 9. With the aforesaid directions, this petition is finally disposed of. 10.Till then no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. 11. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them. 12. It is made clear that the petitioners will not be granted any further time by this Court as directed above. Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Atul kr. sri. Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad