HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7544 of 2025 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicants is taken on record. 2. Sri Sanjay Vikram Singh and Sri Parth Sharma, Advocates, have filed their Vakalatnama on behalf of the informant. The same is also taken on record. 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the material placed on record. 4. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 173 of 2025, under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 109, 351(3), 352 B.N.S., Police Station Hasayan, District Hathras. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. In the first information report nine named accused including the applicants are nominated. As per the first information report, co-accused Anokhe Lal is alleged to have caused injury to Sohit. The case of the applicants is clearly distinguishable from that of co-accused Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ganesh Datta Sharma, Pankaj Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mahesh And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Anokhe Lal. At this stage there is no credible evidence to link the applicants with the offence. The criminal history of the applicants has been explained in Paragraphs- 4 and 5 of the supplementary affidavit. The investigation is still pending and the applicants have apprehension of their arrest in the above case. 6. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 7. Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, and, in particular, the facts that as per the first information report, co- accused Anokhe Lal is alleged to have caused injury to Sohit and at this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicants with the offence, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 8. In the event of arrest, the applicants- Mahesh and Kanhaiya 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 applicants shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation. (ii) The applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. (iii) The applicants shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court. (iv) The applicants shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. Their passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court. NABAIL No. 7544 of 2025 2 (v) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. (vi) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge, and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS. 9. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same. 10. The application stands disposed of. September 16, 2025 SKT/- NABAIL No. 7544 of 2025 3 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad