Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:4784 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 11718 of 2024 Applicant :- Awadh Bihari Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicant for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No.506 of 2024, under Section 409 I.P.C., P.S. Bairia, District Ballia, during pendency of trial. 3. As per F.I.R. allegation, applicant, who was appointed as Incharge Secretary (non cadre) block Bairia, District Ballia, misappropriated the amount of Rs.486805.52 and despite repeated demand, he has not deposited the amount. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. On perusal of F.I.R., prima facie, no offence disclosed against the applicant. He next submits that without departmental inquiry, instant F.I.R. has been lodged. There is no direct evidence against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history. It is next submitted that the applicant's case is squarely covered under Section 482 B.N.S.S. It is submitted that the applicant is apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation. 5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that from the record, it is apparent that applicant is not cooperating with the departmental inquiry. 6. The object of anticipatory bail is that a person should not be unnecessarily harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy personal vendetta or grudge of complainant or any other person operating the things directly or from behind the curtains. 7. It is well settled that discretionary power conferred by the legislature on this Court cannot be put in a straitjacket formula but such discretionary power either grant or refusal of anticipatory bail has to be exercised carefully in appropriate cases with circumspection on the basis of the available material after evaluating the facts of the particular case and considering other relevant factors (nature and gravity of accusation, role attributed to accused, conduct of accused, criminal antecedents, possibility of the applicant to flee from justice, apprehension of tempering of the witnesses or threat to the complainant, impact of grant of anticipatory bail in investigation or society etc.) with meticulous precision maintaining balance between the conflicting interest, namely, sanctity of individual liberty and interest of society. 8. Considered the argument raised by counsel for the applicant and perused the record. Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case and considering the submissions advanced, the nature and gravity of the accusation and there is allegation of embezzlement, no interference is warranted by this Court. 9. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. 10. However, if the applicant surrenders before the concerned court within two weeks from today and applies 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. 11. For the period of two weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. Order Date :- 9.1.2025 Meenu Singh Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad