Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:5451 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2153 of 2024 Applicant :- Diwakar Tiwari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Kumar Shukla,Shivam Srivastava 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- Diwakar Tiwari on anticipatory bail in Case Crime (FIR) No. 162 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Visheshwarganj, District Bahraich. Vide order dated 19.09.2024, notice was issued to the complainant/opposite party no.2 and as per the 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 19.09.2024, 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 No.162/2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Visheshwarganj, District Bahraich. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent. The allegation is on co-accused Kamal Tiwari. The offences are triable by magistrate. Applicant has no criminal history. Applicant was not arrested during investigation. The charge-sheet has been filed. Applicant undertakes to cooperate in the trial. It is lastly submitted that in the statement of Malti Devi who is the grandmother of applicant, no allegation has been made on him. Issue notice to respondent No. 2. Learned Addl. Government Advocate prays for and is granted two weeks' time to file counter affidavit. List on 17.10.2024. On due consideration to the argument advanced as well as perusal of the record and the fact that offences are triable by magistrate, applicant has no criminal history, during investigation applicant was not arrested so also the statement of Malti Devi and also considering the judgment passed by Supreme Court in Mahdoom Bava v. CBI reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 299 and without entering into the merit of the case, 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 19.09.2024, 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, Diwakar 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 :- 27.1.2025 Praveen Digitally signed by :- PRAVEEN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench