HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7430 of 2025 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. At the outset, Sri Bharat Singh, counsel for the applicants prays for withdrawal of the present application on behalf of applicant no. 1. 2. Accordingly, the application is dismissed as withdrawn on behalf of applicant no. 1 3. Heard counsel for the applicants, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. 4. This application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants in Complaint Case No. 215 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 254 of 2017, under sections 307, 323, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station- Chandausi, District- Sambhal. 5. Insofar as applicant nos. 2, 3 and 4 are concerned, counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant nos. 2, 3 and 4 have been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the first information report and the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the role of firing has been assigned to the co-accused, Dharampal. The case of the applicant nos. 2, 3 and 4 are clearly distinguishable from that of co-accused, Dharampal. The other injured Pitambar received injuries which were found simple in nature. After investigation, final report was submitted against the applicants. Thereafter, protest petition was filed. The protest petition was treated as a complaint case and the applicants has been summoned by the concerned Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bharat Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Dharampal And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) court. The applicants had cooperated in the investigation. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest in the above mentioned case. In case, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the said liberty. 6. Learned A.G.A. has 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, antecedents of the applicants and the fact that as per the first information report and the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the role of firing has been assigned to the co-accused, Dharampal; the other injured Pitambar received injuries which were found simple in nature; at this stage, there is no substantive evidence against the applicants, t he applicants 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 applicants are entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 8. In the event of arrest, the applicants Raju, Santosh and Mukesh Kumar, 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 make themselves available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (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 from disclosing such facts to the Court; (iii) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport the same shall be deposited by them before the concerned court. 9. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same. NABAIL No. 7430 of 2025 2 10. The application stands disposed of. September 25, 2025 Sachin Mishra NABAIL No. 7430 of 2025 3 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad