Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47332 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 883 of 2025 Applicant :- Bhola Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Bhushan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Chandra Bhushan, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Satyendra Srivastava, 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.245 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 409, 406 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Fatanpur, District Pratapgarh. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 30.12.2018 against five persons including the applicant stating that payments were released for construction of latrines under Pradhanmantri Gramin Awas Yojna without actual construction thereof. Regarding the applicant it is stated in the F.I.R. that the applicant is the accountant and he is the first signatory under MGNREGA Scheme. He is responsible for scrutinizing the files before processing the payment but the applicant has not performed his duties properly and has made payments illegally. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail- application it has been contended that the applicant is innocent, he has no criminal history and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. 5. The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and he has submitted that the applicant is a public servant and he has committed the offence by processing payments under a government scheme without actual constructions having been carried out. 6. The substantive allegation in the present case is of processing and making payments for construction of latrines without actual constructions thereof. Even as per the F.I.R. allegations the applicant is the accountant. He was not responsible for making any spot inspection for verification of construction works and the only allegation against him is that he was responsible for examining that documents. 7. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the applicant is a government servant 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. 8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant-Bhola Pal 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 :- 13.8.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench