Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 86354 (ALL)

ABHISHEK BAGHEL ALIAS HARSH PRATAP SINGH v. STATE OF U.P.

NABAIL/6725/2025 · 2025-08-20

Vivek Varma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:143591 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 6725 of 2025 Applicant :- Abhishek Baghel Alias Harsh Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mool Chandra Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant as well as Sri P.K. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 2. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.388 of 2024, under sections 352, 109(1), 351(3) B.N.S., P.S. Kandauli, District Agra. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 19.11.2024. The first information report was lodged on 23.11.2024. The delay is fatal to the prosecution case. As per the first information report the allegation of firing has been assigned to co-accused Anil. The injured was examined by the doctor on 26.11.2024. As per the medical report, no external injury was seen at the time of examination. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The investigation has been completed. The applicant had cooperated in the investigation. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicant has been summoned by the concerned Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. In case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant and the fact that the delay in lodging the first information is fatal to the prosecution case, as per the first information report the allegation of firing has been assigned to co-accused Anil, as per the medical report, no external injury was seen at the time of examination, a vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant, the fact that the applicant had cooperated in the investigation and no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 6. 6. In the event of arrest, the applicant Abhishek Baghel Alias Harsh Pratap Singh, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall make himself available on each and every date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (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; (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 his before the concerned court. 7. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same. 8. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 21.8.2025 S.S. Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad