HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 129 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Aman Agarwal, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Jayant Singh Tomar, the learned Additional Government Advocate-I appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.0445 of 2024, under Sections 316(2), 316(5) B.N.S., registered at Police Station Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow. 3. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order passed on 23.05.2025: "Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned counsel for opposite party. Learned counsel for applicant is granted liberty to implead the informant as opposite party No.2 and to renumber the opposite parties during course of day. Issue notice to opposite party No.2. First anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to case crime No.445 of 2024 under Sections 316(2) & 316(5) BNS, P.S. Vibhutikhand, District Lucknow. As per contents of first information report, allegation levelled against the applicant is that he is a travel agent and issued fake tickets to the informant. It is also stated that even refund of an Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prem Prakash Pandey, Adil Aziz Khan, Aman Agarwal, Saurabh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A. Santosh Kumar Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) amount of Rs. 10,87,785/- was not made nor was the matter resolved. It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that he has been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against him and that the tickets in fact were not fake. It is submitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history and undertakes to cooperate in the investigation which is still ongoing. Learned A.G.A. has opposed bail application but admits that investigation is still ongoing and there is nothing adverse with regard to applicant's cooperation in the same. It is also admitted that applciant does not have any criminal history. 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. Let the accused-applicant Santosh Kumar Yadav 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. 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 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. List this case on 7th July, 2025 as fresh along with service report. Objections may be filed in the meantime." 4. In spite of the aforesaid order having been passed on 23.05.2025, the learned counsel for the applicant has not impleaded the informant as opposite party no.2 till date and he has NABAIL No. 129 of 2025 2 not taken any steps in compliance of the order dated 23.05.2025. 5. The State has filed a counter affidavit specifically stating in para 26 that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation. The counter affidavit was served upon the learned counsel for the applicant on 19.05.2025 and no rejoinder affidavit has been filed till date. 6. From the aforesaid conduct of learned counsel for the applicant, it appears that the averment made in the counter affidavit that the applicant is not cooperating in the proceedings is correct. 7. Accordingly, keeping in view the aforesaid conduct of the applicant, this court is of the considered view that he does not warrant exercise of discretion of this court by granting pre-arrest bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is dismissed and the interim order dated 23.05.2025 is vacated. September 16, 2025 Ram. NABAIL No. 129 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench