HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 478 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri. Prabhat Kumar Upadhyay, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manish Vikram Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records. 2. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order passed on 02.05.2025 by a Coordinate Bench of this Court: "1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of opposite parties no. 1 to 3. 2. Issue notice to opposite party no.4. 3. First anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to case crime No. 368 of 2023 under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 409 & 120-B IPC, P.S. Pachpedwa, District Balrampur. 4. As per contents of F.I.R., the applicant alongwith co-accused is said to be instrumental in embezzling amounts sanctioned for construction purposes in the Primary School concerned in the year 2008-09 by opening accounts falsely in the name of informant who came to know about the said embezzlement when notice was issued to her on 04.11.2016. 5. It is submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in charges Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Nawab Ahmad Khan, Prabhat Kumar Upadhyay, Rajjab Ali Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A. Mohammad Yunus Khan .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) levelled against him and that he has already superannuated from the school. It is submitted that investigation is still ongoing without any direct or indirect evidence yet collected against applicant. It is submitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history and is ready and willing to co-operate in the investigation. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed bail application but does not dispute the aforesaid fact that applicant does not have any previous criminal history. It is, however, submitted that the F.S.L. report clearly indicates that accounts were opened by fabricating signatures of the informant. 7. 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 as yet there are only allegations levelled against applicant of having embezzled the amount indicated. The entire dispute pertains to year 2008-09. Investigation is yet ongoing and applicant undertakes to co-operate in the same. 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 Mohammad Yunus Khan 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 ABAIL No. 478 of 2025 2 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 19.05.2025, as fresh along with service report. 12. Objection may be filed in the meantime" 3. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of material collected during investigation but there is no allegation of misuse of the liberty of granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant has filed a rejoinder affidavit. 5. 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 02.05.2025 granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. In view of above, the interim order dated 02.05.2025 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed. September 15, 2025 Preeti. ABAIL No. 478 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench