HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9606 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.178 of 2026, under Sections 109, 115(2), 333, 352 BNS, Police Station- Chandauli, District Chandauli, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the above-mentioned case. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident in question is said to have occurred on 21.04.2026 but the FIR was lodged belatedly on 22.04.2026, with the allegation that four accused have assaulted the informant and his family members It is contended that there is cross version of the FIR and cross case, wherein two injured from the side of the accused applicant and one injured from the side of the informant, both are related. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is further contended that similarly situated co-accused Pramod Yadav and Pyare Yadav have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court on 14.07.2026 in NABAIL No.6529 of 2026 and case of applicant of applicant stands on similar footing to that of co-accused. The applicant undertakes that he will cooperate in the investigation and will not violate conditions of the anticipatory bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Keshari Nandan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ghoore @ Ashirvad .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicants. 5. The scope of ambit of anticipatory bail is encapsulated in three insightful judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court right from Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab reported in (1980) 2 SCC 565, Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694 and Sushila Aggarwal and others Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, wherein it is consistently held by Hon'ble Apex Court that while granting anticipatory bail, the Court should consider the application of the applicant to evaluate the threat or apprehension of arrest vis-a-vis the nature and gravity of accusation, criminal antecedent of the accused, false or exaggerated implication, need of custodial interrogation, willingness of the accused to cooperate in investigation and trial and the conduct of the accused and flight risk. 6. Taking note of the fact that there is cross version of the FIR and cross fight between the parties, gravity of accusation, criminal antecedents and apprehension of arrest in the case vis-a-vis low flight risk and assurance of the accused in cooperating with the investigation and trial and 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. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. In the event of the arrest of the applicant Ghoore @ Ashirvad, 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, NABAIL No. 9606 of 2026 2 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; 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail. 10. 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 16, 2026 S.A. NABAIL No. 9606 of 2026 3 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- SALMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad