HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9305 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicants 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 applicants in Case Crime No.59 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 118(2) B.N.S., Police Station Quolariya, District Bareilly, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail as the applicants apprehend their arrest in the abovementioned case. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants has contended that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR initially was lodged for offences under Section 115(2), 351(2) of the BNS. Later during investigation, the police has added Section 118(2) BNS. Learned counsel has stated that Section 118 BNS has two parts. One deals with simple hurt being caused by dangerous weapons or means and the other deals with grievous hurt caused by dangerous weapons or means. Learned counsel states that despite there being no grievous injuries suffered by the injured, the investigating officer has filed the charge-sheet under Section 118(2) of the BNS along with other allied sections. Learned counsel contends that the applicant Nos.1, 2 and 3 have no criminal history and applicant no. 4 has a criminal history of two cases including the present case and one case being Case Crime No.194 of 2020 under Section 304 IPC in which the applicant is on bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hasan Parvej, Hasan Sardar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shripal And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has pointed out that the applicant no. 4 has a criminal history of one other case under Section 60 of the Excise Act, which has not been explained. Learned A.G.A. however could not point out any injury which could be categorized to be grievous in nature. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the parties. 6. The applicants are not previous convicts. The applicant Nos.1, 2 and 3 do not have any criminal antecedents. The two injured have received three injuries each and none of the injuries have been opined to be dangerous to life. Of the cumulative six injuries suffered by the injured, two were complaints of pain. It appears that the charge-sheet has been filed under Section 118(2) of the BNS without there being any grievous injury present on the injured to increase the gravity of the offence. The applicants were not arrested during investigation and once the charge- sheet has been filed, the applicants are no longer required for any custodial interrogation or recoveries. 7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to enlarge applicants on anticipatory bail. 8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. 9. The applicants - Shripal, Madan Lal, Mahesh and Suresh shall appear before the trial Court within four weeks from today and shall be released on bail on filing their personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- i. The applicants shall remain present before the trial Court on each date fixed unless exempted by the trial Court; ii. 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; NABAIL No. 9305 of 2026 2 iii. The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; iv. 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 23, 2026 A. Pandey NABAIL No. 9305 of 2026 3 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad