HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9790 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No. 65 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 126, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 117(2), 110 of the B.N.S., Police Station- Shahpur, District Muzaffar Nagar, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and seek anticipatory bail on the following grounds: i. The applicant has not been assigned any specific role; ii. The only serious injury has been received by the injured Devendra, who has received a fracture of his temporal bone. The other injuries received by the three injured persons are of simple in nature. iii. Eight persons have been attributed the role of assault in the First Information Report and none of the injuries found on the injured have been found to be dangerous for life. iv. Co-accused Aashu Pal, Teenu Pal, Tushar Chandel and Ritik have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 18.02.2026 & 27.02.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail U/S 482 BNSS No. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mukesh Pal @ Kallu .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 1401 of 2026 & 1230 of 2026 respectively. The case of the applicant stand on a similar footing. v. The applicant has a criminal history of one other case in which he is on bail and is not a previous convict. 4. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail and has stated that applicant is the nominated accused in the First Information Report with specific role of assault on the injured being given to them. However, he could not dispute the contention of learned counsel for the applicant that similarly situated co-accused Aashu Pal, Teenu Pal, Tushar Chandel and Ritik have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 18.02.2026 & 27.02.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail U/S 482 BNSS No. 1401 of 2026 & 1230 of 2026 respectively 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. 6. As per the FIR, eight accused persons including the applicant are said to have assaulted the first informant side as a result of which, three persons are said to have received injuries, however, none of the injuries have been found to be dangerous to life except injured Devendra who has received fracture of his temporal bone. 7. 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 accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must also evaluate the entire available material against the accused carefully and the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 8. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case as well as settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, the nature of allegation and the role of the applicant and also the fact that similarly situated co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. NABAIL No. 9790 of 2026 2 10. In the event of the arrest of the applicant- Mukesh Pal @ Kallu, he shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and surety in the like amount 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 28, 2026 Junaid NABAIL No. 9790 of 2026 3 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- JUNAID AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad