Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46014 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 870 of 2025 Applicant :- Ravindra Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Rajndra Kumar Dwivedi, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Avishesh Kumar Singh, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.116 of 2024, under Sections 120-B, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Hazratganj, District Lucknow. 3. In the affidavit filed in support of the application for anticipatory bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has falsely been implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. 4. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 30.04.2024 against 7 named persons, including the applicant and some unknown persons stating that the U.P. Subordinate Service Selection Commission had conducted selection to 72 posts of Supervisor, Grade-III for which the eligibility condition was having passed intermediate with science or agriculture and possessing one year diploma in food processing. As against 72 posts only 8 candidates were selected in the selection process and one candidate (the applicant) was selected provisionally. Upon verification of the diploma certificates of the candidates issued by Sri Krishna Deo Arya University, Anantpuram, Andhra Pradesh the University communicated that it does not conduct any such diploma and therefore the diploma certificate produced by the candidates were forged. 5. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant's selection was merely provisional and he was not selected finally, therefore, no occasion arose for the applicant to join his services and to be appointed in pursuance of the selections made and no benefit has been drawn by the applicant on the basis of alleged forged certificate. 6. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant possesses a degree of Master of Technology and he has been selected for Ph.d. 7. The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and he has submitted that the investigation of the case is still going on. 8. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the F.I.R. states that the applicant had been selected merely provisionally and he has not been appointed on the post as his selection never attained finality and the applicant did not draw any benefit therefrom coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal history and without making any observations which may affect the outcome of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. 9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant-Ravindra Singh before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of S.H.O./Court concerned on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court: (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. . (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 7.8.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench