HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7370 of 2025 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant as well as Sri V.P.Tripathi, learned AGA for the State, and perused the material placed on record. 2. This application under Section 482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 263 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 324(4), 352, 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 110, 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station Jhangaha, District Gorakhpur. 3. 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 seven named accused is alleged to have assaulted the informant and his daughter. As per the medical report of the informant - Arun Pratap Singh, he received five injuries. As per the statement of the radiologist 'fracture of shaft of ulna and fracture of patella' is seen. Another injured Arpita Singh received two injuries. The injury no.2 was simple in nature, whereas the injury no.1 was referred NCCT head. No NCCT head report is available in the case diary. The exact nature of injury no. 2 is not known at this stage. Further, vague and general allegations have been levelled against the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender, who caused the injury no.1 to injured Arpita Singh. It is next contended that the nature of injuries sustained by the two injured shows that there was no intent to murder. At this stage, there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the investigation is pending Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Dev Prasad Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. 4. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Learned 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 and antecedents of the applicant, in particular the fact, that as per the medical report of the informant - Arun Pratap Singh, he received five injuries; as per the statement of the radiologist 'fracture of shaft of ulna and fracture of patella' is seen; injured Arpita Singh received two injuries; the injury no.2 was simple in nature, whereas the injury no.1 was referred NCCT head; no NCCT head report is available in the case diary; the exact nature of injury no. 2 is not known at this stage; vague and general allegations have been levelled against the applicant; at this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail till the submission of police report. 7. In the event of arrest, the applicant- Dev Prasad Singh be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 193 (3) BNSS, 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. NABAIL No. 7370 of 2025 2 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. September 10, 2025 Sachin Mishra NABAIL No. 7370 of 2025 3 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad