Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:12494 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 639 of 2025 Applicant :- Awadesh Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard Sri M.P. Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicants for enlarging them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No 207 of 2024, under Sections 109, 333, 115(2), 352, 351(2) of BNS, Police Station Saadh, District Kanpur Nagar. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive; Injuries received by injured are simple in nature and no specific role has been assigned to applicant No.1. Applicants have not caused any injury to the injured, the injury shown by injured are fabricated. The injury caused by injured are by other persons. Due to prior enmity, the present FIR has been lodged against the applicants. It is submitted that the applicants are apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation. 4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there is direct allegation against the applicant. Involvement of applicants in the present case cannot be denied as injured has received grievous injuries. As per CT Scan report, focal depressed fracture is seen in the left parietal bone of the injured, as such, applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant may be rejected. 5. The object of anticipatory bail is that a person should not be unnecessarily harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy personal vendetta or grudge of complainant or any other person operating the things directly or from behind the curtains. 6. It is well settled that discretionary power conferred by the legislature on this Court cannot be put in a straitjacket formula but such discretionary power either grant or refusal of anticipatory bail has to be exercised carefully in appropriate cases with circumspection on the basis of the available material after evaluating the facts of the particular case and considering other relevant factors (nature and gravity of accusation, role attributed to accused, conduct of accused, criminal antecedents, possibility of the applicant to flee from justice, apprehension of tempering of the witnesses or threat to the complainant, impact of grant of anticipatory bail in investigation or society etc.) with meticulous precision maintaining balance between the conflicting interest, namely, sanctity of individual liberty and interest of society. 7. Considering the involvement of applicants in the present case as injured has received grievous injuries as injured has sustained fracture on left parietal bone, I find no good ground for anticipatory bail to the applicants in the aforesaid case. No interference is warranted. 8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. Order Date :- 24.1.2025 Nitin Verma Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad