1 Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:45183 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 851 of 2025 Applicant :- Gajraj Lekhpal Kshetra Shekhapur Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Yatendra Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Yatendr Pal Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anurag Verma, learned A.G.A- l for the State and persued the record. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 191/1999, under Sections 467, 468, 419 and 420 I.P.C., Police Station Payagpur, District Shrawasti (now Bahraich). 3. Initially, the applicant had challenged validity of the FIR by filing Writ Petition No.3929(MB) of 1999, wherein the applicant's arrest was stayed by means of an interim order dated 23.09.1999 till filing of the police report. Thereafter, the trial court issued a non- bailable warrant against the applicant. The validity whereof was challenged by filing Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 757 of 2002, which was disposed of by means of an order dated 24.05.2002, whereby, the non-bailable warrant issued against the applicant was 2 quashed, subject to the condition that the applicant will appear before the trial court on 29.05.2002. The order specifically provided that, in case of default, the trial court will be free to issue non-bailable warrant. Thereafter, the applicant filed Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 1161 of 2002, challenging validity of the charge sheet and the summoning order, which was disposed of by means of an order dated 14.10.2004, providing that, in case the applicant appears before the trial court within a month from the date of the order, he would be released forthwith on his furnishing necessary bonds and securities for his continuous appearance as and when directed. 4. It transpires that since the passing of the aforesaid order dated 14.10.2004, the applicant has not appeared before the trial court. The applicant had filed an application seeking anticipatory bail before the session judge, which has been rejected by means of an order dated 20.09.2004, and even thereafter the applicant did not approach this court expeditiously. 5. Having gone through the aforesaid facts of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid conduct of the applicant shows that he has not cooperated with the proceedings of the trial, in spite of the repeated directions issued by this Court. 3 6. In these circumstances, this court is of the considered view that the applicant is not entitled to be granted the discretion of this court by granting pre-arrest bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is dismissed. [Subhash Vidyarthi,J.] Order Date :- 4.8.2025 Arvind Digitally signed by :- ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench