HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9586 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Shivang, Learned counsel for the informant and Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.591 of 2026, under Sections 119(2), 115(2), 131, 352, 109(1) B.N.S., Police Station-Indrapuram, District-Ghaziabad, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the abovementioned case. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is not named in the FIR, which has been lodged against 6-7 unknown persons. Learned counsel has further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. One co- accused, Om Dhama, was arrested by the police and in his confessional statement, he has only taken the name of co-accused Himanshu Rana and Nitish and has not taken the name of the applicant. Learned counsel has further submitted that except call detail records, where the applicant is stated to be in contact with the co-accused Om Dhama, there is no other direct evidence against the applicant. None of the eye-witnesses have named the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the informant and Learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail and have contended that the injured was brutally Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohammad Belal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shivang Naveen Rai .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) assaulted using hard and blunt objects. The head injuries were found to be dangerous to life. There is a fracture of the fibula also present. The brutal manner in which the incident has been perpetrated clearly disentitles the applicant for consideration of anticipatory bail. They have further submitted that the call detail records also establish the complicity of the applicant. No reason has been given for the false implication of the applicant. Learned counsel for the informant and Learned A.G.A. have not disputed the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the parties. 6. The FIR has been lodged against 6-7 unknown persons. One co- accused Om Dhama was supposedly arrested by the police and on being asked as to who else was involved in the occurrence along with him, he has named Himanshu Rana, Nitish and 3-4 other youths. The name of the applicant has not been disclosed by him. The name of the applicant surfaces in the information received by the police from a police informer and other than the said information, there appear to be some call detail records which indicate that the applicant was in touch with the co-accused Om Dhama. As per the call detail records, the locations of Om Dhama, Naveen Rai (the applicant), Nitish Kumar and Himanshu Rana were found to be at the same place i.e. M/s Ganesh Developers property situated at Vasundhara, Sector-16-A, Ghaziabad. In the opinion of the Court, merely due to the fact that the location of the applicant coincides with that of the co-accused, cannot necessarily lead to a conclusion of the applicant participating in the crime in question. The co-accused Om Dhama, who has been arrested, has only disclosed the name of co-accused Nitish and Himanshu Rana. In the opinion of the Court, the involvement of the applicant may be on account of his being in contact with the co- accused Om Dhama. 7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to enlarge applicant on anticipatory bail. 8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. NABAIL No. 9586 of 2026 2 9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant-Naveen Rai, he shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court concerned with the following conditions:- i. the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii. that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness; 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail. 11. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case. September 30, 2026 A. Pandey NABAIL No. 9586 of 2026 3 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad