Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:45614 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12238 of 2024 Applicant :- Sahban Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Case called out in the revised list. Counsel for the applicant is not present. 2. This application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 13 of 2020, under Sections 272, 273 I.P.C., and 60 Excise Act, Police Station Ghosi, District Mau. 3. At the out set, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State submits that the charge-sheet was submitted against the applicant on 23.2.2020 and the applicant was summoned. It has been asserted in para 17 of the paper book that the first anticipatory bail application of the application was rejected on 17.1.2023. Consequent thereto, the applicant failed to appear before the concerned court. Further, bailable warrant was issued on 5.1.2024 and non-bailable warrant was issued on 11.9.2024. Process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued on 4.11.2024. The applicant is evading the process of law. On that ground, he submits that the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 4. Perused the record with the assistance of learned AGA. The order-sheet reflects that the charge-sheet was submitted against the applicant on 23.2.2020 and the applicant was summoned. The first anticipatory bail application of the application was rejected on 17.1.2023. The applicant failed to appear before the concerned court. Consequently bailable warrant was issued on 5.1.2024 and non-bailable warrant was issued on 11.9.2024. Process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has also been issued on 4.11.2024. The applicant is well aware of the pending proceedings and is evading the process of law. 5. 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." 6. In view, thereof, such conduct of the applicant does not entitle him for grant of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the application is hereby rejected. Order Date :- 2.4.2025 S.S. Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad