Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38782 Court No. - 52 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12424 of 2024 Applicant :- Anil Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Girja Shanker Sen,Krishna Dutt Awasthi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. Heard Mr. Girja Shanker Sen, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. S.N. Tiwari, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.143 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467 and 468 I.P.C., Police Station- Sirauli, District- Bareilly, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. He further submits that the co-accused persons have also been released on anticipatory bail in (i) Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.287 of 2025 (Satya Pal vs. State of U.P. and Another) vide order dated 13.02.2025 and (ii) Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.1580 of 2025 (Rampal And Another vs. State of U.P. and Another) vide order dated 04.03.2025. Hence, the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegation made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant has also been touched upon length. The applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co- operate during investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant. He has submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicant, he is not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicant is not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear, anticipatory bail cannot be granted. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. In the instant case, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Anil Kumar in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned/Court below concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected; (ii) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police as and when required; (iii) that the applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iv) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation, if pending, of the present case in accordance with law, expeditiously, independently without being prejudiced by any observations made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant. Order Date :- 18.3.2025 Kalp Nath Singh Digitally signed by :- KALP NATH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad