HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9842 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant 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. 266 of 2026, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109, 352 and 351(2) of the B.N.S., 2023, Police Station Amroha Dehat, District Amroha, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends their arrest in the abovementioned case. 3. The Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicants were not named in the FIR. Their names surfaced in the confessional statement of the co-accused Himanshu and Vikas. The similarly situated co-accused Deepanshu has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in NABAIL No.10022 of 2026. The case of applicants stands on a similar footing. Applicant no.1 has criminal history two other cases and in one case, final report has been submitted while in the other case, the applicant has been acquitted. Applicant no.2 has criminal history of one other case in which he has not been charge sheeted. 4. The Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, but does not dispute the explanation given by the learned counsel for the applicant with respect to their criminal antecedents. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the parties. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Anit Kumar And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 6. This appears to be a case involving no injury. The incident in question is stated to have arisen out of a dispute between two groups, which led to the lodging of the FIR, wherein the other group was already present. The applicants were not named in the FIR. The similarly situated co-accused Himanshu has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. 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. 9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant- Anit Kumar and Vinayak, they shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing their 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 applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii. that 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; iii. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; iv. that the applicants 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 29, 2026 Junaid NABAIL No. 9842 of 2026 2 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- JUNAID AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad