Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:21090 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 853 of 2025 Applicant :- Haseen Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Pathak,Harshit Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No.584 of 2001, under Section 409 I.P.C., and Section 8/11 of Molasses Control Act, P.S. Deoband, District Saharanpur, during pendency of trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Earlier, the applicant challenged the F.I.R. before this Court and the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.12.2001 stayed the arrest of the applicant/petitioner. Thereafter, in the year 2002, the Investigating Officer submitted charge sheet after completing investigation. The court, without application of judicial mind, issued summon against the applicant. The applicant first time got the knowledge regarding summon on 18.11.2024 when notice was pasted at the house of the applicant. Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant will co-operate with the trial proceedings. The instant case is squarely covered under section 482 B.N.S.S. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would co-operate with the investigation. Applicant has definite apprehension of his arrest by the police. 5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that charge sheet was submitted in the year 2002 against the applicant thereafter the applicant has not participated in the trial proceedings. The applicant willfully avoided the trial proceedings then the court concerned issued bailable and non bailable warrants against the applicant and initiated proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C.The applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant may be rejected. 6. Considered the argument raised by counsel for the applicant and perused the record. No interference is warranted by this Court as Investigating Officer has collected evidence and submitted charge sheet against the applicant and the applicant has deliberately avoided the court proceedings since last 23 years. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. 8. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of anticipatory bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. 9. However, if the applicant surrenders before the concerned court within two weeks from today and applies for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the court concerned, in accordance with law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922. 10. For the period of two weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 Meenu Singh Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad