HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8545 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.0306 2026, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109(1), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 125, 131 BNS, 2023 and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, Police Station- Kosikalan, District Mathura, 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 applicants has contended that the police has lodged an FIR against 12 named accused and 6-7 unknown persons showing the arrest of 4 named accused and recovery of 2 sticks with the allegation that two parties, one headed by Rahul @ Chaina son of Moolchand and Moolchand son of Kanhaiya and the other headed by Rajpal son of Devi Sahay and Rinku son of Yogesh @ Titu, who had an old enmity, were indulging in violence, assaulting each other. The police responded on the information received on the number 112 and is said to have arrested Rahul @ Chaina, Moolchand son of Kanhaiya, Rajpal son of Devi Sahay and Rinku son of Yogesh @ Titu. In the medico-legal examination of the four persons arrested, except Rahul @ Chaina, none of the accused were found to have received any visible injury and even the two injuries received by Rahul @ Chaina were opined to be simple in Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rahul Kumar, Surbhi Bhardwaj, Ulajhan Singh Bind Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Yash And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) nature. No specific role has been given to the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. 4. The learned AGA has informed this Court that applicant no. 2 has been arrested and in view of the statement given by the learned AGA, which has also been accepted by learned counsel for the applicant, the application so far as the applicant no. 2 is concerned, is dismissed as having become infructuous. 5. For the applicant no. 1, this Court has considered the anticipatory bail application on its own merits. 6. The FIR has been lodged by the police. No specific role has been given to the applicant no. 1. None of the injured has received any injury which could be categorized to be grievous in nature or dangerous to life. The applicant no. 1 has no criminal antecedents and taking note of the number of accused nominated in the FIR, false implication of the applicant cannot be ruled out. 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 no.1 on anticipatory bail. 8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application so far as the applicant no.1 is concerned, is allowed. 9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant, Yash (applicant no.1), 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; NABAIL No. 8545 of 2026 2 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 8, 2026 S.A. NABAIL No. 8545 of 2026 3 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- SALMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad