Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:18728 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 363 of 2025 Applicant :- Shoeb Akhtar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Kartikay Singh,Vijay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party no.1. 2. Learned counsel for applicant is granted liberty to implead informant in the array of opposite parties during the course of day. In view of order being passed, notices to opposite party no.2 stand dispensed with. 3. First Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with regard to Case Crime no.08 of 2023, under Sections 392, 413 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Sultanpur. 4. As per contents of first information report, which has been lodged against unknown persons, incident is said to have taken place on 25.11.2022 when two motor cycle borne persons snatched away mobile phone of informant. 5. It has been submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in charges levelled against him which could be evident from fact that it has been lodged against unknown persons. It is submitted that F.I.R. does not even disclose registration number of the motor cycle nor is there any recovery from applicant. Learned counsel submits that applicant in fact purchased the mobile phone without any knowledge that it was a stolen property. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed anticipatory bail with submission that mobile phone was subsequently recovered with IMEI number and submits that contents of F.I.R. clearly indicate offence having been made out. It is submitted that applicant has four other criminal cases which however has been explained in affidavit filed in support of the application. 7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, subject to further evidence being collected during investigation, it appears that F.IR. has been lodged against unknown persons. The aspect of recovery from applicant or some other person and whether he has purchased the said mobine phone would be subject matter of evidence. The investigation is still ongoing. Thus, in view of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, it would be appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C./482 BNNS.. 8. In view of the above, it is provided that till filing of police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C. in the event of arrest, the applicant Shoeb Akhtar shall be released on anticipatory bail in aforesaid Case Crime number on his/her furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned with the following conditions:- (i) That the accused-applicant shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation; (ii) That the accused-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; and (iii) That the accused-applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (9) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this order. 10. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 4.4.2025 kvg/- Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench