Allahabad High Court

HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Present application has been moved on behalf of the applicants - Anil and Manjeet seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 324 of 2025, under Sections 310(2), 352 of BNS, P.S. Gabhana, District Aligarh.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. As per the prosecution story when the informant was returning from village Lalpur on motorcycle alongwith his friend Pradeep Chauhan on 7.10.2025 at 8.30 p.m. Deepak Kumar stopped the motorcycle and requested for help and as soon as the motorcycle was stopped, seven miscreants suddenly reached there with danda in their hands and they caught both of them and started assaulting and by threatening them they also took mobile phones, violet, aadhar card, pan card etc.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. It is also submitted that the real story, which was concealed by the prosecution, is that all the youngsters from both sides knew each other and at the time of incident actually a party was organized and they were enjoying the same and meanwhile some photographs of the girl friend of accused Anil was clicked by other set of 2 NABAIL No. 9866 of 2025 youngsters and when Anil asked to delete the said photographs a quarrel took place between the two. Prosecution story is an exaggerated version of the incident and in fact no marpeet was caused by the applicants and this fact is corroborated with the fact that in the medical examination only simple injuries or no injury has been found by the doctor. It is also submitted that the applicants are students and preparing for further examinations. They have no criminal history to their credit and no motive of the incident has been assigned in the prosecution story. The investigation of the case is going-on and charge-sheet has not been filed. It has been submitted that in case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

7. It appears that investigation in the matter is going on and the applicants are cooperating with the I.O. Applicants have no criminal history to their credit. It also appears that they are students preparing for further examinations and injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature.

8. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood influencing course investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not 3 NABAIL No. 9866 of 2025 is a matter of discretion.

9. In Siddharth Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 1 Supreme Court Cases 676, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made between the existence of the power to arrest and the justification for exercise of it. If arrest is made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. If the Investigating Officer has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond or disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated with the investigation, then there is no compulsion on the officer to arrest the accused.

10. Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicants till filing of police report under Section 193 (3) of BNSS before the Competent Court.

11. The application is allowed accordingly.

12. In the event of arrest of the applicants in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer concerned with the following conditions :-

1. The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

2. 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 4 NABAIL No. 9866 of 2025 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

3. The applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

4. The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

5. The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail of applicants in accordance with law. November 26, 2025 (Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)

HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Present application has been moved on behalf of the applicants - Anil and Manjeet seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 324 of 2025, under Sections 310(2), 352 of BNS, P.S. Gabhana, District Aligarh.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. As per the prosecution story when the informant was returning from village Lalpur on motorcycle alongwith his friend Pradeep Chauhan on 7.10.2025 at 8.30 p.m. Deepak Kumar stopped the motorcycle and requested for help and as soon as the motorcycle was stopped, seven miscreants suddenly reached there with danda in their hands and they caught both of them and started assaulting and by threatening them they also took mobile phones, violet, aadhar card, pan card etc.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. It is also submitted that the real story, which was concealed by the prosecution, is that all the youngsters from both sides knew each other and at the time of incident actually a party was organized and they were enjoying the same and meanwhile some photographs of the girl friend of accused Anil was clicked by other set of 2 NABAIL No. 9866 of 2025 youngsters and when Anil asked to delete the said photographs a quarrel took place between the two. Prosecution story is an exaggerated version of the incident and in fact no marpeet was caused by the applicants and this fact is corroborated with the fact that in the medical examination only simple injuries or no injury has been found by the doctor. It is also submitted that the applicants are students and preparing for further examinations. They have no criminal history to their credit and no motive of the incident has been assigned in the prosecution story. The investigation of the case is going-on and charge-sheet has not been filed. It has been submitted that in case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

7. It appears that investigation in the matter is going on and the applicants are cooperating with the I.O. Applicants have no criminal history to their credit. It also appears that they are students preparing for further examinations and injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature.

8. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood influencing course investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not 3 NABAIL No. 9866 of 2025 is a matter of discretion.

9. In Siddharth Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 1 Supreme Court Cases 676, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made between the existence of the power to arrest and the justification for exercise of it. If arrest is made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. If the Investigating Officer has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond or disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated with the investigation, then there is no compulsion on the officer to arrest the accused.

10. Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicants till filing of police report under Section 193 (3) of BNSS before the Competent Court.

11. The application is allowed accordingly.

12. In the event of arrest of the applicants in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer concerned with the following conditions :-

1. The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

2. 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 4 NABAIL No. 9866 of 2025 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

3. The applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

4. The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

5. The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail of applicants in accordance with law. November 26, 2025 (Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)