Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:33380 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 626 of 2025 Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Singh @ Vijay Kumar Bhadauriya @ Vijay Kumar Singh Bhadauriya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajit Singh,Apporv Pal,Naved Ali 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. 2. First Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with regard to Case Crime no.228 of 2006, under Section 420 IPC and Sections 9/13(1) (D) r/w 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station Naubasta, District Kanpur Nagar. 3. As per contents of first information report which was lodged in the year 2006, allegation levelled against applicant is that he demanded and was paid an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- on the false promise for providing employment in the police. Applicant is shown as a police official at the relevant time. 4. It is submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against him which would be evident from the fact that cash payment is said to have been made to the applicant, which could not be corroborated by the informant. Learned counsel for applicant has drawn attention to statement of informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. to submit that he subsequently recanted the story. It is submitted that applicant had earlier filed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. bearing No.3747 of 2008 in which interim protection was granted vide order dated 16.10.2008 and continued till 19.09.2023 when the case was dismissed as infructuous. It is submitted that applicant did not have any knowledge with regard to said dismissal due to which non-bailable warrants were issued against him and he filed another application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. bearing No.2569 of 2025 which was disposed of vide order dated 01.4.2025 granting liberty to applicant to approach in bail jurisdiction. It is submitted that subsequently the anticipatory bail application was filed before trial court which has been rejected. It is submitted that applicant is of advanced age and undertakes to cooperate in trial. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed anticipatory bail with the submission that aforesaid aspects clearly indicate complicity of applicant in allegation levelled against him and also admitted to the fact that non bailable warrants have been issued against him. It is however admitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history. 6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, it appears that statement of informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. may not corroborate allegations levelled in the FIR and would be subject matter of evidence during the course of trial. It is evident that applicant was under protection of interim order passed by this Court in the year 2008 till the year 2023. He is of advanced age and without previous criminal history undertakes to cooperate in trial. 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 BNSS. 7. In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, applicant Vijay Kumar Singh @ Vijay Kumar Bhadauriya @ Vijay Kumar Singh Bhadauriya 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 court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) 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 tamper with the evidence; (ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail; Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed. 8. It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. 9. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 30.5.2025 Renu/- Digitally signed by :- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench