Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:114956 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 5584 of 2025 Applicant :- Abhishek Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri P.K. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State. Perused the material on record. 3. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in anticipatory bail no. 367 of 2025 (State vs. Abhishek Yadav) arising out of Case Crime No. 24 of 2025, under sections 317(2), 303(2) B.N.S., and 4/21 Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, Police Station Kotra, District- Jalaun. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. False recovery of red soil has been shown the from the alleged vehicle. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The applicant is neither the owner nor the driver of the alleged vehicle. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further, the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. 5. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the investigation is pending in the matter. A prima facie case is made out. Referring to the provisions of Section 35 B.N.S.S. it is submitted that since offences levelled in the first information report are punishable up to seven years only the applicant cannot be arrested. An apprehension of arrest shown in the anticipatory bail is not genuine. Thus prayer has been made for rejection of anticipatory bail. 6. I have considered the rival submissions raised by learned counsel for the parties. 7. In the matter, it is evident from the record that anticipatory bail has been moved for the offences in which the maximum punishment is seven years. There is a specific provision under Section 35 B.N.S.S. on point of arrest of the accused relating to the offences punishable up to seven years. Until and unless the mandate given in Section 35 B.N.S.S. is complied by the Investigating Officer, accused of such offences cannot be arrested. 8. Thus keeping in view of the statutory provisions on point of arrest of the accused, the Court is of the opinion that there is no need of anticipatory bail as the applicants cannot be arrested without complying with the provision given in Section 35 B.N.S.S. Specific provisions under Section 35 B.N.S.S. have been provided giving protection to the accused persons for arrest of offences punishable up to seven years punishment. Thus, prayer made in the present application is refused. 9. With the above observations, the present application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 S.S. Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad