Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:141289 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 6623 of 2025 Applicant :- Sany Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhand Pratap Singh,Shobhit Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 177 of 2024, under Section 108 of B.N.S., Police Station Tindwari, District Banda, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on anticipatory bail. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. It has further been submitted that there is allegation of abatement to suicide against the applicant and one other co-accused that these two accused were used to molest the minor daughter of the informant and on account of such harassment caused to her she committed suicide by inhaling some poisonous substance. Learned counsel further submits that there is no suicide note on record to connect with the crime. The charge sheet has been filed in the matter against the applicant and other co-accused, where as there is no cogent evidence available on the face of record. Thus, it has been argued that the applicant has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above- mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Learned counsel further submits 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 he 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, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and has contended that during after collecting material evidence the Investigating Officer submitted charge sheet, therefore, there is no merit in the present application and the same may be rejected. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. The anticipatory bail application is rejected. Order Date :- 19.8.2025 Mustaqeem. Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad