HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7300 of 2025 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Short counter affidavit filed on behalf of informant is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Yashaswin Venugopal Bajpai, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Shri Zafar Abbas, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record. 3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 0276 of 2025, under Sections 281, 125(A), 125(B), 105, 61(2) of B.N.S., Police Station Naini, District Prayagraj, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on anticipatory bail. 4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. The F.I.R. was lodged against two accused including the applicant and one unknown person. The injured Aditya Chauhan, who was also the witness of the alleged incident, in his statement before the police has stated that applicant was exhorting the co-accused to run over the car on his motorcycle. Learned counsel further submits that though presence of applicant is not doubtful at the place of occurrence but only allegation of exhortation has been assigned to the applicant. Learned counsel further submits that till date no charge sheet has been filed against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. 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 cooperate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for first informant have Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Praful Dev Shukla, Sr. Advocate, Vishakha Pande, Yashaswin Venugopal Bajpai Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Zafar Abbas, G.A. Prateek Pandey .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) vehemently opposed the application for anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the informant have stated that non bailable warrant has been directed to be issued against the applicant, therefore, applicant does not deserve any indulgence. 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, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 8. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 9. In the event of arrest of the applicant-Prateek Pandey, involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail till submission of police report on his 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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) the applicant would co-operate during investigation and trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. 10. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. September 15, 2025 Mustaqeem. NABAIL No. 7300 of 2025 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad