Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111390 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 5266 of 2025 Applicant :- Avneesh Alias Rinku Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Arun Kumar Sharma,G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Sharma, counsel for the informant-opposite party no.2 as well as Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State, and perused the material placed on record. 2. This application under Section 482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 93 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 190, 115(2), 109, 118(2) B.N.S., Police Station Allau, District Mainpuri. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the first information report, the applicant and the co-accused Saurabh @ Muski are alleged to have assaulted the informant and his brother Satendra. As per the medical report of Satendra, he received eight injuries. All the injuries were found simple in nature, except injury no.5 on the nasal region. In the opinion of the doctor, the injury no.5 was grievous in nature. It is contended that although the said injury was grievous in nature but not dangerous to life. The nature of injuries received by Satendra shows that there was no intent to murder. Further, the author of the single injury caused on the nasal region, is not known. It is next contended that in the alleged incident four persons from the side of the applicant has also received injuries. The brother of the applicant lodged a first information report being Case Crime No. 108 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS, Police Station Allau, District Mainpuri. It is a cross case. The aggressor is still to be ascertained. At this stage, there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the investigation is pending and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. 4. Learned AGA for the State and the counsel for the opposite party no.2 have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, in particular the fact, that the nature of injuries received by Satendra shows that there was no intent to murder; in the alleged incident four persons from the side of the applicant has also received injuries; it is a cross case, the aggressor is still to be ascertained; at this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report. 7. In the event of arrest, the applicant- Avneesh @ Rinku be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 193 (3) BNSS, on 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 with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) The applicant 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned. 8. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. 9. The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant. 10. The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order. 11. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 11.7.2025 Lbm/- Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad