Mohammad Wasi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

Mohammad Wasi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant Mohammad Wasi in Case Crime No. 0524 of 2025 under Sections 115(2)/352/117(3)/351(3) B.N.S., Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow.

Court's answer

The Court recorded that injury no. 1 sustained by the injured, Mohd. Raiz, is grievous in nature as opined in the supplementary medical report of Balrampur Hospital dated 02.09.2025 and as per the statement of Dr. Karamveer Singh, apparent from the X-ray; the prosecution witnesses and the injured supported the prosecution case, with the injured making specific allegations against the applicant regarding the grievous injury.

Ratio / Principle

On due consideration of the case diary, the injury report, the statements of the injured and other witnesses, the gravity of the offence, the grievous nature of the injury, the minimum punishment of ten years prescribed under Section 117(3) B.N.S., and the point that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy to be exercised only in exceptional circumstances (false implication or absence of material justifying custodial interrogation), the Court was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail under S. 482 BNSS (Application No. 1947 of 2025) sought by Mohammad Wasi in Case Crime No. 0524 of 2025 (Ss. 115(2)/352/117(3)/351(3) B.N.S., P.S. Thakurganj, District Lucknow) is dismissed by Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar, J. (Court No. 15, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) on December 9, 2025. Although counsel submitted that the applicant was falsely implicated, had no previous criminal history and himself sustained injuries, the Court, perusing the case diary, found injury no. 1 (lacerated wound, 1.5 cm, tip of right index finger) grievous per the supplementary medical report of Balrampur Hospital dated 02.09.2025 and the statement of Dr. Karamveer Singh, apparent from the X-ray; the injured Mohd. Raiz (who also bore a vertical abrasion, 8 x 0.5 cm, on the neck near the thyroid cartilage) and the prosecution witnesses supported the prosecution case with specific allegations against the applicant. Considering the gravity of the offence, the grievous nature of the injury, the statutory minimum of ten years under S. 117(3) B.N.S., and the exceptional-circumstances threshold governing anticipatory bail, the Court declined the application.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1947 of 2025

Mohammad Wasi

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Samrat Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Court No. - 15

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0524 of 2025, under Sections 115(2)/352/117(3)/351(3) B.N.S., Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that during the alleged incident, the applicant also sustained injuries. It is contended that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has no previous criminal history.

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand, has opposed the bail application and submits that the injured, Mohd. Raiz, was subjected to medicolegal examination.

Perused the record as well as the case diary provided by the learned A.G.A..

Perusal of the medico legal examination report shows that the injured sustained:

(i) injury no. 1 — lacerated wound measuring 1.5 cm on the tip of the right index finger;

(ii) injury no. 2 — vertical abrasion measuring 8 × 0.5 cm on the

NABAIL No. 1947 of 2025

2

middle of the anterior side of the neck extending towards the base near the thyroid cartilage.

Both injuries were initially opined to be simple in nature. However, in the supplementary medical report of Balrampur Hospital dated 02.09.2025, it has been opined that the digital part of the terminal phalanx of the middle finger of the left hand is not visualized, and therefore injury no. 1 is grievous in nature, which is also apparent from the X-ray. As per the statement of Dr. Karamveer Singh, injury no. 1 is grievous in nature. The prosecution witnesses have supported the prosecution case. The injured, Mohd. Raiz, has also supported the prosecution case and has made specific allegations against the applicant regarding causing the said grievous injury.

On due consideration of the case diary produced by the learned A.G.A., the injury report, the statements of the injured and other witnesses, the gravity of the offence, the nature of the injury, and the sentence provided under Section 117(3) B.N.S., which prescribes a minimum punishment of ten years, and further considering that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy to be exercised only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is satisfied that the applicant has been falsely implicated or where no material exists to justify custodial interrogation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is dismissed.

December 9, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench