HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7703 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicants is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Rakesh Yadav, Advocate, holding brief of Sri S.N. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sunil Vishal Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party and Sri B.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 88 of 2025 under Sections 191 (2), 191 (3), 333, 115 (2), 352, 351 (2), 118 (1), 110 BNS, Police Station Eka, District Firozabad with the prayer that in the event of arrest, the applicants may be released on bail. 4. It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case she has an apprehension that they may be arrested. He further submits that initially, FIR was registered under sections 191 (2), 191 (3), 333, 115 (2), 352, 351 (2), 118 (1) BNS but subsequently, section 110 BNS was also added. It is further submitted that one of the injuries suffered by the injured is grievous in nature. It is further submitted that as per the FIR, there is specific allegation against applicant no.2 Vipin Kumar of causing the said Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sujeet Nath Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anant Narayan Singh, G.A., Sunil Vishal Singh Smt. Vimlesh Alias Bhoori .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) injury but it is submitted that since chargesheet has already been submitted and the offences are punishable up to seven years, the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. It was also submitted that applicants undertake to co-operate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the first informant as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submit that there is specific allegation against applicant no.2 Vipin Kumar that he caused grievous injury on the head of the injured. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. As per the FIR, the offences are punishable up to seven year and chargesheet has already been submitted in the present case. Criminal history of applicant no.2 has been duly explained in the supplementary affidavit filed today. 8. 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, the Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedents of the accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate the entire available material against the accused carefully and the exact role of accused has also to be taken into consideration. 9. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 10. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. NABAIL No. 7703 of 2025 2 11. In the event of arrest of the applicant Smt. Vimlesh @ Bhoori and Vipin Kumar @ Vipan Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their 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 not tamper with evidence and that they would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted 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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicants would cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicants shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 11. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants. October 10, 2025 Madhurima NABAIL No. 7703 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad