JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for State Mr. M.P.S. Gaur.

2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned order dated 13.7.2022, passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C.-I, Gautam Budh Nagar in case No.100 of 2020, arising out of case crime No.18/2020 under sections 323, 308, 452, 506 I.P.C., PS. Ecotech-Ist, district Gautam Budh Nagar (State vs. Bhagat Singh).

3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant is an accused in case crime No.18/2020 under sections 323, 308, 452, 506 I.P.C., PS. Ecotech-Ist, district Gautam Budh Nagar. He filed an anticipatory bail application No.2289 of 2020 before this Court, in which a Coordinate Bench of this court has, vide order dated 17.3.2020, directed release of the applicant on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest, with certain conditions.

4. It is submitted that although the applicant was released on anticipatory bail by this Court, the trial court is insisting for a regular bail and therefore, he filed an application before the trial court to treat the anticipatory bail granted by this Court as a regular bail. However, the trial court vide order under challenge has rejected the prayer of the applicant and held that the anticipatory bail was granted till submission of charge sheet. It is submitted that the order of the trial court is perverse and contrary to the order passed by this Court.

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the petition.

6. For ready reference, order dated 17.3.2020 (supra) is extracted below :

"Vakalatnama filed by Sri Pandey Balkrishna, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.2 is taken on record.

Heard Sri Vinay Prakash Shukla and Sri Durga Prasad Tiwari, learned counsels for the applicant, Sri Pandey Balkrishna, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the averments made in the first information report and rejection order.

It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case by the first informant on account of personal grudge and enmity. In Para 15 of the affidavit, it is stated that the wife of applicant's younger brother had an affair with the brother of first informant and had solemnized second marriage with him. Thereafter, she was claiming her share in the property of her husband which is the bone of contention between the parties. Learned counsel for the applicant states that according to F.I.R. four persons are stated to have assaulted the injured by lathi and danda, however, the injured sustained three local injuries on the face which was subjected to X-ray. Prima facie, offence under Section 308 I.P.C. is not made out against the applicant. The applicant is ready to cooperate with the investigation. The matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to. Therefore, the applicant, having no criminal antecedents to his credit, may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant and other accused had badly assaulted an aged man of 80 years old who had sustained some fracture on his face, however, could not place any supplementary report or document to show that there was any likelihood of the death of the injured. He has also not disputed the averments made in Para 15 of the affidavit. Learned A.G.A. has also borrowed the arguments made by learned counsel for the informant.

Be that as it may, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation and the fact that he has no criminal antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

In the event of arrest of the applicant-Bhagat Singh involved in Case Crime No. 0018 of 2020, under Sections 323, 452, 308, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Eco T