Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22589 Court No. - 14 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2686 of 2025 Applicant :- Satendra Singh Rana Opposite Party :- State Of Up Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. 1. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C/528 B.N.S.S has been preferred with a prayer to quash the order dated 31.01.2025 passed by Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption) C.B.I. Court No.1/Additional District and Session Judge Lucknow in Anticipatory Bail application no. 9089/2024, in case crime no. 25/2024, under section 420,406 I.P.C., Police Station Sushant Golf City, Lucknow, contained in Annexure no. 1 to this application. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is the complainant and he lodged an F.I.R under Sections 406 and 420 I.P.C against the respondent no. 2. The respondent no. 2 has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 02.02.2024 with a condition that the respondent no. 2 had to furnish a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties in the same amount within a period of ten days. 3. It is further submitted that the respondent no. 2 had not given the sureties and the bail bond as provided in the order of anticipatory bail within a period of ten days and on the 12th day i.e. 2 days after the expiry of the aforesaid period, had moved an application on 23.12.2024 for granting ten days further time as he had not been well. The court, vide order dated 31.01.2025 has allowed the application and granted ten days' further time to the respondent no. 2 to complete the formalities as per the anticipatory bail order dated 02.02.2024. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the present application has been filed. 4. It is further submitted that the ground taken by respondent no. 2 in his application for extension of time was that that he was ill and had enclosed the medical documents which are not genuine that is why allowing the application is bad in the eyes of law. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A has submitted that it is the discretion of the court to grant further time for completing the formalities and there is no illegality in the order passed by the court concerned, which is impugned in the present case. 6. On being asked, the learned counsel for the applicant whether respondent no. 2 has completed the formalities within the extended period or not, he has very fairly stated that he has completed the formalities within the extended period. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the records of the case, it is found that it is the discretion of the court and if the court is granting ten days' time that too when an application was moved within two days of the expiry of the earlier period of ten days, there is nothing to be interfered with. 8. Hence, the present application is dismissed. Order Date :- 22.4.2025 DiVYa Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench