Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:106807 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9579 of 2024 Applicant :- Babita Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Pratap Singh,Krishna Anand,Sachin Singh,Satya Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. WITH Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6784 of 2024 Applicant :- Vedpal Singh Dhanker Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Pratap Singh,Krishna Anand,Sachin Singh,Satya Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. WITH Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8453 of 2024 Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Pratap Singh,Sachin Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0670 of 2019 under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station Ecotech-3, District Gautambudh Nagar, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on anticipatory bail. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have an apprehension that they may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. Learned counsel further argued that the applicants did not abet the deceased to commit suicide and that perusal of the F.I.R. allegation demonstrates that no offence under Section 306 I.P.C. is made out against the applicants. It has further been submitted that no coercive process has been issued against the applicants so far. It was also submitted that applicants undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 4. Learned A.G.A.has opposed the application for anticipatory bail. 5. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.11.2024, 24.07.2024 11.090.2024 has granted interim anticipatory bail to the accused-applicant as well as accused- applicant in the connected anticipatory bail application. 6.The interim order granted by this Court goes to show that the applicants were granted interim anticipatory bail application subject to the conditions contained in that order and one of the condition was that the applicants shall make themselves available on each date fixed in the matter by the Court concerned. Perusal of the order sheets of the case, which has been produced before this Court and is taken on record shows that the applicants are not complying with the condition imposed by this Court while granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicants. Furthermore, perusal of the record also shows that there is specific allegations against the applicant. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, has held that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the averments made in the present application, this Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the applicant could not point out any good ground for grant of anticipatory bail. 8. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 9. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected. Order Date :- 7.7.2025 S.Ali Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad