Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:2489 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1906 of 2024 Applicant :- Anoop Kumar Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home , Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Lalu Prasad Bhatt Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.51 of 2023 under sections 419, 420, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Mahmudabad, District- Sitapur. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the applicant was only an employee of the company in question and the alleged amount was deposited in the bank account of company. He further submitted that the alleged offences are punishable upto seven years. He further submitted that the co-accused, Neel Kamal, having identical role, has already been granted interim bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.08.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 of CrPC No.915 of 2024 (copy of bail order is annexed at SA-3 to the supplementary affidavit filed today). He further submitted that charge sheet has already been filed in the present case, therefore, no custodial trial is necessary. He further relied on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharth Vs. State of UP and Anr. reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 615 and requested that the anticipatory bail may be granted to him. 5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of applicant but he did not dispute this fact that during the course of investigation, applicant was not taken into custody. He also conceded this fact that the alleged offence is punishable upto seven years. 6. Considering the argument of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the FIR as well as other relevant documents, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled for interim anticipatory bail. 7. In the event of arrest of the applicant, namely, Anoop Kumar Sharma in the aforesaid case, he shall be released forthwith by the Station House Officer of the police station concerned, on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of the equal amount with the following condition:- (i) That the accused-applicant shall make themselves available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation; (ii) That the accused-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) That the accused-applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 9.1.2025 V. Sinha Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench