YASHAPAL @ YASHAPAL CHAUDHARYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 8512 of 2026

Yashapal @ Yashapal Chaudhary
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)                   :   Rajesh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)              :   G.A.

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.161 of 2026, under Sections 191(2), 191(3),
190, 109(1), 115(2), 352, 351(3) B.N.S., P.S.- Naujhil, 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 applicant contends that the applicant has been
falsely implicated. The First Information Report has been lodged against
six named accused. The injured who are two in number were supposedly
assaulted and the co-accused Arvind is said to have used a country made
firearm to shoot at the injured but they escaped unhurt.The injury reports
which have been filed along with the supplementary affidavit indicate that
there is only a complaint of pain with mild swelling present on the right
foot of the injured Rajendra and an abrasion and a complaint of pain were
found on the injured Ravindra. Relying upon the injury reports, Learned
counsel for the applicant contends that a false case has been set up. He
further states that a broken country made pistol was supposedly snatched
by the injured and other villagers from the accused which was stated to be
broken from the middle and had a live cartridge lodged in it. The
applicant has no criminal antecedents
4. The Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory
bail but could not dispute the factual submissions made by Learned
                                                      NABAIL No. 8512 of 2026
                               2

counsel for the applicant.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsel for the
parties and perused the material brought on the record.
6. The injured have received only simple injuries.The specific role of
using a firearm has been given as per the First Information Report to the
co-accused Arvind. The firearm assigned to the applicant was supposedly
not fired by him and in the act of firing the same was snatched by the
informant and other witnesses named in the FIR. From the number of
accused nominated in the FIR, the number and nature of injuries and the
narration of incident as mentioned in the FIR, in the opinion of the Court,
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 on anticipatory bail.

8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant
is allowed.
9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant Yashapal @ Yashapal
Chaudhary, 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;
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
                                                                                      NABAIL No. 8512 of 2026
                                                                 3

                                    for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be
                                    considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case.


                                                                                  (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
                                    September 8, 2026
                                    Sachin




Digitally signed by :-
SACHIN TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad