Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:139135 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 6527 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Sangeeta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhawesh Pratap Singh,Sanjay Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Shri Ashish Goyal, Advocate, has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of informant, which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Jai Kishan Chaurasiya, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Shri Ashish Goyal, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record. 3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 112 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 352, 115(2), 110, 190, 117(2), 105 of B.N.S., Police Station Mangalpur, District Kanpur Dehat, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and she has an apprehension that she may be arrested in the above- mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. The applicant was not named in the F.I.R. and his complicity came into light in the statements of injured persons including the informant. General allegation has been made against all the accused including the applicant for assaulting with lathi-danda and no specific role has been assigned to any of the accused including the applicant. It has further been submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedents and that no coercive process has been issued against the applicant so far. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to cooperate during investigation and trial and she would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for first informant have opposed the application for anticipatory bail and in the alleged incident one person died and two sustained injuries. Both the injured in their statements have made allegation of assault upon the applicant along with other accused. Thus, there is active participation of applicant in the commission of offence. 6. 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. 7. 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, no case for anticipatory bail is made out. 8. The anticipatory bail application is rejected. Order Date :- 14.8.2025 Mustaqeem. Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad