HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 256 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Ramakar Shukla , the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Avishesh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and Ms. Heena Naqvi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Varun Pandey, the learned counsel for the complainant/opposite party no.2. 2. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order passed on 19.03.2025 by a Coordinate Bench of this Court: "1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for opposite party No.1, State. 2. Learned counsel for applicant is granted liberty to implead the informant as opposite party No.2 and to re-number the opposite parties during course of day. 3. Issue notice to opposite party No.2 4. First anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to case crime No. 468 of 2024 under Section 409 IPC, P.S. Dariyabad, District Barabanki. 5. As per contents of F.I.R., the applicant was employed with postal department and was transferred on 14th May, 2024 but failed to hand over an amount of Rs. 15 lacs to the person who was transferred in his place. The said amount was thereafter deposited by the applicant on 13th June, 2024. 6. Learned counsel for applicant submits that first information report has been lodged after a period of five months from the alleged incident having taken place without any cogent explanation for delay in lodging the F.I.R. It is submitted that even otherwise once it is admitted in the first information report that the amount was subsequently Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ramakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Durgesh Kumar Dixit .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) deposited by the applicant on 13th June, 2024, the ingredients of Section 409 IPC are clearly not made out since there is no intent of any criminal breach of trust. It is also submitted that the applicant has also furnished his explanation for delay in depositing the said amount due to death of his daughter in the meantime. 7. Learned A.G.A. has opposed bail application with submission that even as per submissions of learned counsel for applicant, a case for temporary embezzlement even otherwise is made out. 8. 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. 9. Let the accused-applicant Durgesh Kumar Dixit 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. 10. 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. 11. List this case on 10th April, 2025 as fresh alongwith service report. " 3. The opposite party no.2 has not filed any counter affidavit. Though, ten day' time was granted for this purpose on 08.05.2025 and two weeks' further time by means of an order dated 26.05.2025. 4. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of material collected during investigation. 5. The learned counsel for the applicant has filed a rejoinder affidavit. He further submitted that subsequently a charge-sheet has been submitted on 25.04.2025. He has also submitted that the bail bonds have also been furnished. 6. There is no allegation of misuse of the liberty of granting interim NABAIL No. 256 of 2025 2 anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. In these circumstances, this Court finds no good ground to take a view different from the view taken by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 19.03.2025 granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. 8. In view of above, the interim order dated 19.03.2025 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed. September 18, 2025 Preeti NABAIL No. 256 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench