Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:14547 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2047 of 2024 Applicant :- Neel Kamal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanat Singh,Manish Kumar Verma,Sudhir Kumar,Suhail Kashif Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Vide order dated 9.9.2024, the notice was issued to the opposite party no. 2 and as per office report, the same has been served upon the opposite party no. 2, but no one has put in appearance. Under the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is proceeding in this matter. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Counsel for the State as well as 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. 438/2022, under Sections 419/420/504/506 I.P.C., P.S. Mahmudabad, District Sitapur. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 9.9.2024, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- “The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime/FIR No. 438/2022, under Sections 419/420/504/506 I.P.C., P.S. Mahmudabad, District Sitapur. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that charge sheet in the matter has been filed. During investigation, the applicant was not arrested. Offences are triable by magistrate. No useful purpose will be served by sending the applicant behind the bars. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial. Issue notice to respondent No. 2. Steps be taken within a week. Learned Addl. Government Advocate prays for and is allowed ten days' time to file counter affidavit. List on 19.09.2024. On due considering to the fact that during investigation, the applicant was not arrested; the applicant was branch manager; offences are triable by magistrate as well as considering the judgment of the Supreme Court passed in "Mahdoom Bava v. CBI, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 299"; the applicant is not a previous convict 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 court concerned with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial and he will not influence the witnesses. (2) The accused-applicant will remain present on each and every date fixed by the trial court. (3) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.” From perusal of the order dated 9.9.2024, it transpires that learned State Counsel was directed to file counter affidavit but the same has not been filed as yet. Learned 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 proceedings 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, Neel Kamal 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 order. Order Date :- 10.3.2025 Shravan Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench