HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1128 of 2022 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Ms. Sarva Shukla, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ambika Prasad Mishra, the learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Manish Kumar Pandey, the learned AGA for the State. 3. On 15.07.2022, after hearing learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State, this court had passed the following order: "Heard the applicant in person and Sri Vinay Kumar Shahi, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R. No. 983 of 2016, under Sections 323, 325, 427, 435, 452, 504, 506 Indian Penal Code, Police Station Sangrampur, District Amethi, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail. As per prosecution story, on 6.11.2016, at 10.00 am, five accused persons including the applicant and some unknown persons came to the house of the complainant armed with lathi, danda and other weapons. Due to an old enmity, they abused his daughter Pushpa and broke the household items and burnt the house and also are stated to have inflicted injuries to his daughter. The applicant in person has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case as a counterblast to the Case Crime No. 973 of 2016, which was lodged by brother of the applicant on 3.11.2016, which is three days prior to the incident. The applicant is a practicing advocate at Lucknow High Court and the incident is of district Amethi. The applicant has claimed alibi also. He has further stated that initially the FIR was lodged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 308, 436, 452, 504, 506, 427 IPC, but later on, during investigation, no offence under Sections 308 and 406 IPC were found. Rather Section 435 IPC has been added. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant undertakes that he will cooperate in the investigation failing which the State can move appropriate application for vacation of the interim protection. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ambika Prasad Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ambika Prasad Mishra @ Dadan Mishra (In Person) .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the fact that applicant has no criminal history. Matter requires consideration. Three weeks' time is granted to learned A.G.A. to file counter affidavit. One week's time, thereafter, is granted to the applicant for filing rejoinder affidavit. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the applicant in person as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant, as an interim measure, is liable to 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. In the event of arrest, the accused-applicant Ambika Prasad Mishra @ Dadan Mishra (In Person) shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O./court concerned on the following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required; (ii) the 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; and (iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. List on 8th September, 2022, in the additional cause list." 4. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of material collected during investigation and the applicant has filed a rejoinder affidavit. 5. The learned A.G.A. did not point out any violation of the conditions of interim anticipatory bail by the applicant. Nothing has come to light which may persuade this court to take a view, other than the view taken at the time of granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant. 6. In view of above, the interim order dated 15.07.2022 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed. September 10, 2025 -Amit K- ABAIL No. 1128 of 2022 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench