Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8720 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2284 of 2024 Applicant :- Shivam @ Shubham Tiwari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Kumar Maurya,Vikas Maurya 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. 189 of 2022, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, Police Station Mankapur, District Gonda. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 01.10.2024, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "Heard learned counsel the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime/FIR No. 189/2022, under Sections 379/411 I.P.C., P.S. Mankapur, District Gonda. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the alleged incident is said to have been committed on 13.03.2022. He submits that the applicant could not have committed the alleged theft as he was in jail on the relevant date. Specific pleading in this regard has been taken in paragraph 9 of the bail application. He has explained his criminal antecedent in para 17 of the bail application. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not a previous convict and he undertakes to cooperate in the investigation. Learned Addl. Government Advocate could not reply to the specific pleading made in para 9 of the bail application. List on 23.10.2024. On due consideration to the averment made in para 9 of the bail application, so also the undertaking given by the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial and also considering 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, as an interim measure, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned. The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. In the meantime, learned AGA shall file counter affidavit." From perusal of the order dated 01.10.2024, it transpires that 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, Shivam @ Shubham Tiwari 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 :- 10.2.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench