HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1041 of 2024 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri S.I. Jafri, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rahul Srivastava, learned counsel for C.B.I. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in RC No. DST/2015/A/0004/STB/DLI under Section 120-B r/w 409, 420, 466, 467, 469, 471 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Police Station- CBI, STF, New Delhi, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail. 3. Learned senior Advocate appearing on behalf of applicant submitted that on the basis of of false allegation that applicant misappropriated public fund, he has been made accused in the present matter. 4. He further submitted that after considering entire facts in detail on 08.04.2024 co-ordinate Bench of this Court was pleased to enlarge him on interim anticipatory bail and investigation of the case is still pending. He further submitted that applicant is co-operating with the investigation. He further submitted that there is no allegation that applicant misused the liberty granted to him by this Court vide order dated 08.04.2024. 5. He further submitted that however, applicant is having criminal history of one another cases with almost similar allegation but in that case he has been enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court. 6. He further submitted that considering the above facts, interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant vide order dated 08.04.2024 may be confirmed Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ambreen Masroor, G.A., Sadrul Islam Jafri Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Sanjay Kumar Yadav Santram .....Applicant(s) Central Bureau Of Investigation .....Opposite Party(s) and applicant may be permitted to remain on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for C.B.I. however, opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but could not dispute the fact that vide order dated 08.04.2024 co-ordinate Bench of this Court has enlarged the applicant on interim anticipatory bail and till date charge sheet has not been filed in the matter. 8. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. However, as per allegation, applicant was a public servant and he along with others misappropriated the public fund but it reflects, during investigation, when applicant filed the instant anticipatory bail application then on 08.04.2024 after considering entire facts of the case in detail co- ordinate Bench of this Court was pleased to enlarge him on interim anticipatory bail and there is no allegation that he was not cooperating with the investigation. Further, investigating of the case is still pending. 10. Further, however, applicant is having criminal history of one another cases with almost similar allegation and in that case he has been enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court. 11. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, interim anticipatory bail earlier granted to the applicant vide order dated 08.04.2024 is hereby confirmed. Applicant shall remain on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on the same conditions as earlier imposed upon him by this Court vide order dated 05.08.2021. 12. The instant anticipatory bail application stands allowed. 13. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 16, 2025 KK Patel ABAIL No. 1041 of 2024 2 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad