Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:13900 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11757 of 2024 Applicant :- Shahbaz Ahmad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Mishra,Sanjay Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard Sri Sanjay Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicants for enlarging them on bail in Case Crime No 502 of 2004, under Sections 3/7 of E.C. Act, I.P.C., Police Station Nizamabad, District Azamgarh. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive; Applicant was license holder of fair price shop. FIR registered in the year 2005, thereafter, I.O. submitted charge sheet against the applicant, applicant challenged the charge sheet by filing 482 application bearing No.17299 of 2012, which was disposed of by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.05.2012. On perusal of FIR, no case is made out against the applicant. Applicant challenged the suspension order, which was allowed and shop was restored to the applicant. It is submitted that the applicants is apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation. 4. Considering the argument raised by applicant's counsel and on perusal of record, it is apparent that applicant was received knowledge regarding summoning by trial court and he challenged the same before this Hon'ble Court by filing 482 application, which was disposed off by order dated 18.05.2012, thereafter, applicant did not move for further legal remedy and after about 13 years, present anticipatory bail has been filed, hence, this Court find no good ground for anticipatory bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case. No interference is warranted. 5. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. 6. However, if the applicant surrender before the concerned court within two weeks from today and apply for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the court concerned, in accordance with law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922. 7. Till two weeks from today or till surrender of the applicant before court concerned, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 Nitin Verma Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad