Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:125117 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 5947 of 2025 Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Nigamendra Shukla Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Nigamendra Shukla, counsel for the informant and perused the material placed on record. 2. The instant application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No. 179 of 2025 under Sections 191(1), 191(2), 191(3), 333, 115(2), 109(1), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S., Police Station Bhopa District Muzaffar Nagar. 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 along with five nominated accused are alleged to have assaulted three persons namely Rajat Rathi, Smt. Sudesh and Jogendra Rathi. As per the medical report of the injured Rajat Rathi, he received eleven injuries. All the injuries were simple in nature except injury no. 3 which was referred for x-ray examination. As per the x-ray report, fracture of second and third metacarpal bone, fracture of right scaphoid and fracture of styloid process of right ulna was found. Injured- Smt Sudesh received three injuries which were simple in nature. Another injured, Jogendra Rathi received six injuries. The injury nos. 1, 2, 3 were referred for x-ray examination and the injury no. 5 was kept under observation. As per the supplementary medical report, the injury no. 3 was fracture of left little and fracture of fifth metacarpal bone. The other injuries were simple in nature. It is contended that the injury no. 3 of Rajat Rathi and the injury no. 3 of Jogendra Rathi were grievous in nature but not dangerous to life. The nature of injuries shows that there was no intent to murder. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused the injury no. 3 to Rajat Rathi and Jogendra Rathi. At this stage, there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The investigation is still pending. It is next submitted that the applicant has apprehension of his arrest and in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. 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, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant and the fact that the nature of injuries received by the three injured shows that there was no intent to murder, a vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant, at this stage, there is no substantive evidence against the applicant, 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- Sanjeev Kumar be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 193 (3) B.N.S.S., 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 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 :- 29.7.2025 Sachin Mishra Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad