ISRAWATI AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 4339 of 2026

Israwati And 2 Others
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

State of U.P. and Another
                                                              .....Opposite
                                                                    Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Ashok Kumar Yadav, Rakesh Tripathi-
                                I
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 71
                    HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.

1. Heard Sri Rakesh Tripathi-I, learned counsel for the applicants and
Learned AGA for the State.

2. The present anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of BNSS
has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to release them on
anticipatory bail in Criminal Case No.27861 of 2025 (State Vs .Buneli
Yadav and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 257 of 2025, under
Sections 110, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 117(2) BNS, P.S.- Kasaya, District -
Kushinagar, during pendency of the trial.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that cross FIR has
been lodged by both the sides. The informant is pattidar of the accused
applicants. There was some altercation between the parties which led to
cross fight. The FIR lodged by the informant shows that there were two
injured. One injured has suffered simple injury whereas another has
suffered grievous injury. The FIR lodged by the accused applicants no.2
was having five injured persons. During investigation, the accused
applicants have not been arrested. The accused applicants have no
criminal history. Charge sheet has been submitted. There is cross version
of FIR. The accused applicants want to appear before the trial court but
apprehending arrest.

4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the
applicants.
                                                      NABAIL No. 4339 of 2026
                               2


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 considering 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. Considering the cross version of the FIR and cross fight between the
parties as well as the accused applicants have not been arrested during
investigation, the gravity of accusation 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, is of considered view to grant anticipatory
bail.

7. The applicants- Israwati, Buneli Yadav and Nikhil @ Aditya Yadav
involved in the aforesaid case crime shall appear before the trial court or
the Investigating Officer, as the case may be within 30 days from the date
of this order and shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of
Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction
of the court concerned with following conditions :-

(i) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police
officer or tamper with the evidence.

(ii) The applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
witnesses.

(iii) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court
on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and
                                                                                            NABAIL No. 4339 of 2026
                                                                     3


                                    (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS.

                                    (iv) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she shall
                                    not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the
                                    witnesses are present in the trial court.

                                    (v) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date
                                    fixed, either personally or through his/their counsel.

                                    8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
                                    cancellation of bail.

                                    9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of
                                    determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as
                                    an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely
                                    free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led
                                    unaffected by anything said in this order.



                                                                                               (Avnish Saxena,J.)
                                    May 6, 2026
                                    Krishna*




Digitally signed by :-
KRISHNA KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad