.Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30871 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12091 of 2024 Applicant :- Anil Kumar Kaushik Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajrshi Gupta,Ranjana Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Prabhat Kumar Tiwari Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1.Heard Sri Dileep Kumar Gupta, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Rajrshi Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Prabhat Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicant for enlarging him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 278 of 2016, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Farah, District Mathura. 3. 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. It is alleged in the FIR that informant is a lady, who had applied for admission in B.Ed, in the year 2016, when she inquired about her scholarship; she got information that she has got admission in M.B.A. and scholarship amount has deposited in her account, on inquiry she found that scholarship amount has already been deposited in a forged and fabricated account number opened in her name by pasting her duplicate photograph in the Punjab National Bank and the said amount has already been withdrawn. The applicant is Secretary of the Agra Competition College Society that manages the Unnati Management College. The allegation alleged in the FIR are false and baseless but without any credible evidence the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge-sheet. 4. From the perusal of the allegation made in the FIR as well as other record, it transpires that applicant challenged the FIR by filing Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 18907 of 2016 and the applicant was granted interim protection during the investigation vide order dated 24.08.2016, thereafter chargesheet submitted against the applicant on 13.08.2017. After submission of chargesheet, cognizance applicant has filed 482 Cr.P.C. application No. 9525 of 2918 which was disposed of vide order dated 11.04.2018 with a direction that applicant may file discharge application before the court concerned and also permitted the applicant to appear before the court concerned within a month from the date of the order through his counsel and move an application claiming discharge. The concerned court after hearing the counsel for the parties may decide the application on merits, in accordance with law, within a period of three months. Thereafter applicant filed discharge application and discharge application of the applicant was decided vide order dated 28.11.2019. Thereafter against the order dated 28.11.2019 the applicant again preferred 482 Cr.P.C Application No. 7041 of 2020. The same was dismissed vide order dated 13.08.2024. Thereafter, the applicant moved this anticipatory bail application by submitting that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next submitted that the applicant availing the legal remedy available to him. 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. as well as learned counsel for the informant have submitted that prima facie offence discloses, on perusal of FIR and evidence collected during investigation. The applicant filed 482 Cr.P.C. application by which challenged the chargesheet, the application of the applicant was dismissed by the court, thereafter discharge application moved on his behalf has been dismissed by the court concerned. Thereafter, again the applicant has filed Application 482 Cr.P.C. which too was dismissed by this Court. The trial court has rejected the discharge application filed by the applicant on the basis of evidence submitted by the prosecution side. The applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant deserves to be rejected. 6. Considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant and from the perusal of the record, it is apparent that the Applications filed U/s 482 Cr.P.C. of the applicant have been rejected by the coordinate bench of this court, thereafter applicant moved discharge application before the trial court, which too was rejected on the basis of evidence collected during investigation. Prima facie offenec is made out against the applicant and it is not a case of false implication. 7. The present Anticipatory Bail Application being devoid of merit is rejected. Order Date :- 4.3.2025/RPD Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad