HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8552 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicant, the Learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.230 of 2026, under Sections 331(4), 109 BNS and Sections 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station-Kotwali, District Pilibhit, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the above-mentioned case. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is the son of the informant from his first wife. Despite this fact and the informant being injured witness, the applicant has not been named in the FIR. The injured, who are two in number including the informant, have received two injuries each and there is no supplementary report to indicate the injuries being grievous in nature or dangerous to life. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. 4. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not point out any criminal antecedents of the applicant. 5. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. The applicant is the son of the informant. The mother of the applicant is said to have died due to cancer and the informant was living with one Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vijaya Shankar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Arun Babu .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Lalita Devi who has four children of her own from her first marriage. Prima facie, it appears that some property which was purchased in the name of Lalita Devi after the informant had sold a portion of his own property has led to the dispute between the parties. The FIR itself has been lodged with a delay of two days and despite this fact, the applicant, who is the son of the informant, has not been named. In the opinion of the Court, the subsequent implication of the applicant and his other brothers in the statement of the informant may be an afterthought or a false implication. 7. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it fit to enlarge the 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 Arun Babu, he shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and surety each 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; 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail. NABAIL No. 8552 of 2026 2 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 8, 2026 S.A. NABAIL No. 8552 of 2026 3 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- SALMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad