HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 10182 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Shri Gopal Swaroop Chaturvedi, Learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Raunak Chaturvedi, Learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Devendra Dahma, Learned counsel appearing for the informant and Learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.652 of 2026, under Sections 281, 109 (1), 324(4), 352 of B.N.S, Police Station Quarsi, District Aligarh, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the abovementioned case. 3. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant has contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is not named in the F.I.R. The allegation is that an unknown person while driving his car carelessly had nearly hit the informant and on the objection raised by the informant, the driver of the said vehicle reversed his car and hit the informant, which led to the informant receiving serious injuries. Learned Senior Advocate has contended that there is some C.C.T.V. footage of the incident, which is inconsistent with the averments made in the F.I.R. None of the injuries sustained by the informant have been opined to be grievous in nature or dangerous to life. Learned Senior Advocate has further submitted that assuming without admitting that the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ronak Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Devendra Dahma, G.A., Mukesh Kumar Upadhyay, Vimal Kumar Tripathi Dr Anant Kumar Sharma .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) incident had occurred, then it is at best a case of road rage and cannot be considered to be a case of attempt to murder. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. 4. Learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and has contended that the applicant in an attempt to kill the informant had reversed his car and hit the informant which led to him receiving injuries. The informant's life was saved due to divine providence and the applicant had left no stone unturned to kill the informant. Learned counsel for the informant has further submitted that there are eye-witnesses to the incident. The applicant may be required for custodial interrogation and recoveries. He may not be considered for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. has not been able to point out any criminal antecedents of the applicant. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the parties. 7. The applicant is not named in the F.I.R. The recital in the case diary with respect to the C.C.T.V. footage indicates that there may have been some verbal spat between the informant and the driver of the vehicle in question. It is during this verbal argument that the car in question was reversed and the driver hit the informant which led to the informant falling in a ditch. The informant has suffered two injuries which have not been opined to be grievous in nature or dangerous to life. The applicant is stated to be the owner of the vehicle in question. The applicant is an anesthesiologist of repute and is presently working as Consultant Anesthesiologist at Kailash Hospital, Khurja. He does not have any criminal antecedents. 8. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to enlarge applicant on anticipatory bail. 9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. NABAIL No. 10182 of 2026 2 10. In the event of the arrest of the applicant-Dr Anant Kumar Sharma, 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; 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail. 12. 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. 10182 of 2026 3 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad