HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8065 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Shri Manish Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri O.P. Singh, 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.234 of 2023, under Sections 406, 420, 504, 506, 323 of IPC, Police Station Quarsi, District Aligarh, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the case relates to some civil dispute, which has been given colour of criminality. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences under Sections 420, 406 IPC and as per law laid-down in the case of Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. and Others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2248 and pointed out that both the offences under Sections 406, 420 IPC can not be applied simultaneously, as they both are antithetical to each other. It is also submitted that the offences alleged are punishable up to 7 years imprisonment. It was also submitted that applicants undertake to co-operate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, 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. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manish Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt. Asma Parveen And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail. 5. As per first information report, the allegation is that the applicant induced the first informant to purchase a plot and consideration amount of Rs.7,00,000/- was fixed. Out of which, two cheques were issued in the name of Asma of Rs.2,00,000/- each bearing cheque Nos.649749 dated 13.12.2021 and 469749 dated 13.12.2021 were fradulently withdrawn by the applicant no.1. The maximum punishment, which can be awarded on conviction for the offences as alleged is 7 years and the applicants are having no criminal history. 6. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. 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. 7. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 8. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 9. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Smt. Asma Parveen and Arshad Hushain involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions :- (i) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence and that they would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (ii) The applicants 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; NABAIL No. 8065 of 2025 2 (iii) The applicants would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 10. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants. October 7, 2025 RKM NABAIL No. 8065 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad