Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:7557 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1937 of 2024 Applicant :- Jagannath Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 125 of 2021, under Sections 147, 436, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Mawai, District Faizabad/Ayodhya. The notice has been issued to the complainant/opposite party no. 2 and as per office report, the same has been served personally but no one is present for the complainant/opposite party no. 2. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 28.08.2024, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "1. The present application has been filed by the applicant Jagannath seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 125 of 2021, under Section 147, 436, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Mawai, District Faizabad/Ayodhya. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as perused the record. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that general allegations have been leveled on all the accused persons total five named and one unnamed. There are three injured. Injury are simple in nature. From perusal of the prosecution case, no offence under Section 436 IPC is made out. The applicant has been falsely implicated.He has no criminal history. Charge-sheet has been filed. The applicant was not arrested during investigation. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial. 4. Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail, however, he submits that ingredients to attract section 436 IPC is missing. He prays for and is allowed two weeks' time to file objections/counter affidavit. 5. Issue notice to respondent No.2. 6. Steps be taken within a week. 7. On due consideration to the fact that ingredients to attract Section 436 IPC are totally missing, the allegation are general in nature, prima facie it apppears that charge-sheet has been filed casually under Section 436 IPC as also the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant till the next date of listing. 8. Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant Jagannath shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:- 1. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; 2. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; 3. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; 4. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail. Such other reasonable conditions which the learned trial court may deem fit may be imposed. 9. List on 19.9.2024. 10. The Circle Officer concerned shall file his personal Affidavit showing as to what are the material on the basis of which charge-sheet has been filed under Section 436 I.P.C, by the next date of listing." From perusal of the order dated 28.08.2024, it transpires that the State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceeding or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Jagannath till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. Order Date :- 5.2.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench