Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38785 Court No. - 52 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9979 of 2024 Applicant :- Km Prachee Singh @ Prachi Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amresh Bahadur Tiwari,Anil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. Heard Mr. Amresh Bahadur Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0475 of 2016, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali City, District- Mirzapur, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is second Anticipatory Bail Application filed by the applicant. The first bail application was rejected by order dated 11.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.5129 of 2020 (Km. Prachee Singh Alias Prachee Singh vs. State of U.P.). He further submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and she has an apprehension that she may be arrested in the above mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against her. He further submits that the co-accused persons have also been released on anticipatory bail in (i) Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 11526 of 2024 ( Arvind Kumar Pal And Another vs. State of U.P.) vide order dated 11.12.2024, (ii) Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.10766 of 2024 (Ram Kumar vs. State of U.P.) vide order dated 14.11.2024, (iii) Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.10786 of 2024 (Usha Pal vs. State of U.P.) vide order dated 14.11.2024, (iv) Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.10149 of 2024 (Anju Devi vs. State of U.P. and Another) vide order dated 24.10.2024 and Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.11870 of 2024 (Indrawati Devi vs. State of U.P. and Another) vide order dated 19.12.2024. Hence, the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. The applicant has no criminal history as the same has been explained in paragraph no.23 of this application.Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegation made against her. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant has also been touched upon length. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and she would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate during investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant. He has submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicant, she is not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicant is not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear, anticipatory bail cannot be granted. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court 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. In the instant case, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Km Prachee Singh @ Prachi Singh in the aforesaid case crime, she shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned/Court below concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she is suspected; (ii) the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by the police as and when required; (iii) 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iv) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation, if pending, of the present case in accordance with law, expeditiously, independently without being prejudiced by any observations made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant. Order Date :- 18.3.2025 Kalp Nath Singh Digitally signed by :- KALP NATH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad