HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 617 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Shri Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and Shri Mohd. Arif Khan, learned A.G.A.-I for the State. 2. The applicants were granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 03.06.2025: "Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicants is taken on record. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime/FIR No. No. 461 of 2023, Section 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 323, 342, 504, 506, 147 IPC, registered at Police Station Gudamba, District Lucknow. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. As per contents of first information report, allegation levelled against applicants and co-accused is that they deceitfully induced the informant to make substantial investment in the Company namely Time- City Real Estate India Limited and sister companies investing substantial amount of many in the aforesaid Companies on the false pretext of providing immoveable properties which was never executed. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the Chairman of Time-City Real Estate India Limited has already been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Court vide order dated 05.02.2025. A copy of the said bail order is on record Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manoj Kumar Mishra, Ajay Kumar Verma, Piyush Tripathi, Shubham Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Gaurav Mani Ajeet Singh Yadav And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) as Annexure No. 15 to the anticipatory bail application. It is further submitted that co-accused Susheel Kumar Mishra, who is alleged to have played a similar role, has also been granted anticipatory bail. It is further contended that the dispute appears to be of a civil nature. Out of the total investment of Rs.13,17,500/- made by the complainant, an amount of ?1,08,000/- has already been refunded. Learned counsel for the applicants undertakes that the applicants shall execute the sale deed with regard to immovable property plot No. 104 in favour of the complainant. The applicants have explained their criminal antecedents in the supplementary affidavit. He also undertakes that the applicants shall cooperate with the investigation and subsequent trial proceedings. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that the investigation is still ongoing. However, he does not dispute the fact that the applicants are cooperating with the investigation. Issue notice to respondent No. 2. Let necessary steps be taken within one week. Learned Additional Government Advocate is granted two weeks? time to file a counter affidavit. List this matter on 24.07.2025. Considering the bail granted to co-accused Susheel Kumar Mishra, the fact that the offences are triable by a Magistrate, the regular bail granted to the Chairman of the company, the undertaking given by the applicants, and in view of the principles laid down in Sushila Aggarwal and Others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, this Court, without entering into the merits of the case, deems it appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicants under Section 438 Cr.P.C., as an interim measure. In view of the above, the applicants Ajeet and Hari S. Pandey @ Hari Shankar Pandey are directed to join the investigation within twenty days from today. Upon doing so, the Investigating Officer shall release the applicants on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer, subject to the following conditions: 1. They shall fully cooperate in the investigation and shall not influence any witness. 2. They shall remain present whenever summoned by the I.O./S.H.O. for investigation or interrogation. 3. The applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection." ABAIL No. 617 of 2025 2 3. The learned counsel for the complainant has put in appearance on 12.06.2025 but has not filed any counter affidavit. 4. The State has also not filed any counter affidavit. 5. Learned counsel for the complainant is not present to oppose the anticipatory bail application. 6. The learned A.G.A.-I does not allege violation of any condition of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicants. 7. Keeping in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, there is nothing which may persuade this Court from taking a different view than the one taken by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicants. 8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. The interim order dated 03.06.2025 is made absolute in terms of the aforesaid order. September 16, 2025 S. Shivhare ABAIL No. 617 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench