HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 140 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Shri Farooq Ayoob, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State. 2. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 14.05.2025: "1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party. 2. First anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to case crime No. 821 of 2024, under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 352, 351(2) of BNS, P.S. Dewa, District Barabanki. 3. As per contents of F.I.R.,the applicant along with co-accused are an Agent and officers of Loni Urban Multi State Credit & Thrift Co-operative Society and induced the informant to invest substantial amount of money in the said organization but neither was the principal or any interest to repaid. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.). 5. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the allegation has been levelled against six named persons and some unknown persons. As per the allegation, one Company in the name of 'The Loni Urban Multi-State Credit & Thrift Co-operative Society' has been launched by the present applicant and other persons taking money with assurance that such money shall be re-paid with good interest but Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Farooq Ayoob, Mansi Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Rajput .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) the amount has not been repaid. The present applicant was a Agent of the aforesaid Company which was duly registered under the Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. The present applicant was engaged as Agent like other Agents and he deposited the money of some persons with the Company under the bonafide impression that the aforesaid Company shall repay the amount as per its assurance. The present applicant was not the beneficiary of the fund, rather, he was only interested for his salary. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the investigation is going on. There is one criminal history against the present applicant. He is having permanent address, therefore, there is no flight risk. He is ready to cooperate in the investigation, therefore, in the light of the dictum of Apex Court rendered in the case in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 the liberty of the present applicant may be protected. 7. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicant but he is unable to dispute the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant. 8. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material on record, prima facie subject to evidence led in trial, it appears that the applicant has been indicated and admits to be an agent in the aforesaid organization and was not involved in day to day functioning of the society. The aspect of whether the applicant was an agent or an officer of the said organization would be subject matter of evidence during the course of investigation which is still ongoing in which the applicant undertakes to cooperate. The criminal history of one case has already been explained. 9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court finds it to be a fit case of interim anticipatory bail. 10. Let the accused-applicant Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Rajput as an interim measure be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court. 11. In the event of arrest, the accused-applicant shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:- (i) That the accused-applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The NABAIL No. 140 of 2025 2 applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. (ii) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. 12. Issue notice to respondent no.2. 13. List this case on 5th June, 2025 as fresh along with service report. 14. Objections may be filed in the meantime. 15. Learned A.G.A. shall obtain instructions by the next date of listing regarding cooperation of the applicant." 3. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of the materials collected during the investigation. 4. The learned A.G.A.-I does not allege violation of any condition of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. 5. Keeping in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, there is nothing which may persuade this Court from taking a different view than the one taken by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant. 6. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. The interim order dated 14.05.2025 is made absolute in terms of the aforesaid order. September 17, 2025 S. Shivhare NABAIL No. 140 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench