Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:15892 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 11502 of 2024 Applicant :- Payoj Aggarwal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anshul Pathak,Rahul Singh Dahiya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the counsel for the applicant, is taken on record. 2. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No. 3956 of 2012, under Sections 18(a) and 27(d) of Drugs and Cosmetic Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Muzaffar Nagar. 3. At the outset, learned AGA submits that the summons were issued to the applicant on 04.09.2012. The applicant filed an Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 2242 of 2022 (Payoj Aggarwal Vs. State of U.P.). No interim order in favour of the applicant was granted. Bailable warrant was issued against the applicant on 28.09.2013, non-bailable warrant was issued on 27.07.2017. The applicant is absconding and is evading the process of law. Process under Section 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. has also been issued against him. On that ground, he submits that the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 4. Heard Sri Sanjeev Sahay, Advocate assisted by Sri Anshul Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant through Video Conferencing and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the record. 5. Perusal of the order-sheet reflects that summons were issued to the applicant by the court concerned on 04.09.2012. Bailable warrant was issued on 28.09.2013, non-bailable warrant was issued on 27.07.2017. Further, the application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. no. 2242 of 2022 filed by the applicant for quashing the proceedings of the instant case is still pending consideration. No interim order has been passed. The applicant is well aware of the pending proceedings. The issuance of process under Section 82/83 Cr.P.C. against the applicant by the trial court has also not been disputed by the counsel for the applicant 6. The Apex Court in the case of Srikant Upadhyay and others vs. State of Bihar and another, (2024) 3 SCR 421 in paragraphs 25 and 26 has held as under:- "25. The factual narration made hereinbefore would revel the consistent disobedience of the appellants to comply with the orders of the trial Court. They failed to appear before the Trial Court after the receipt of the summons, and then after the issuance of bailable warrants even when the are co- accused, after the issuance of bailable warrants, applied and obtained regular bail. Though the appellants filed an application, which they themselves described as "bail-cum-surrender application" on 23.08.2022, they got it withdrawn on the fear of being arrested. Even after the issuance of non-bailable warrants on 03.11.2022 they did not care to appear before the Trial Court and did not apply for regular bail after its recalling. It is a fact that even after coming to know about the proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., the did not take any steps to challenge the same or to enter appearance before the Trial Court to avert the consequences. Such conduct of the appellants in the light of the aforesaid circumstances, leaves us with no hesitation to hold that they are not entitled to seek the benefit of pre-arrest bail. 26. The upshot of the discussion is that there is no ground for interfering with the order of the High Court rejecting the application for anticipatory bail rather not considering application on merits. Since their action is nothing short of defying the lawful orders of the Court and attempting to delay the proceedings, this appeal must fails. Consequently, it is dismissed." 7. In view thereof, the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 8. Accordingly, the application is hereby rejected. Order Date :- 5.2.2025 Lbm/- Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad