HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1170 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Piyush Asthana, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Shikhar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. 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. 278/2024, under Section 209 IPC, Police Station Raniganj, District Pratapgarh. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 25.07.2024 against the applicant and another accused person Rana Kashyap, the then accountant, by the present branch manager of U.P. Sahkari Gramin Vikas Bank Ltd. stating that a customer of the bank had made a complaint that he had issued term deposit receipts in the year 2016 handed over to her by co-accused Rana Kashyap but upon maturity of the same it turned out that the receipts were fake. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no previous criminal history. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a copy of the complaint made by the customer of the bank has been annexed as Annexure No. 5 to the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Piyush Asthana Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Anand Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. Of U.P. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) application wherein she has levelled allegation against the co- accused Rana Kashyap only and she has not made any allegation against the applicant. 6. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was in no way involved in issuance of the alleged fake certificate and, therefore, the complainant has not levelled any allegation against him in her complaint. Next submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that a regular disciplinary inquiry has also been instituted against the applicant which is still pending and the applicant has not been held guilty in the same. 7. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the anticipatory bail application and he has submitted that investigation in the matter is still going on and he has further submitted that a bare perusal of the copies of term deposit receipts annexed with the affidavit filed in support of the application indicates manipulation. 8. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the complainant has not levelled any allegation against the applicant; that the applicant is still in service of the bank and he is facing a disciplinary inquiry and that there appears to be no reasonable apprehension of the applicant absconding from the process of law, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted interim anticipatory bail. 9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant- Anand Kumar before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their 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 themselves 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 NABAIL No. 1170 of 2025 2 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. September 9, 2025 Pradeep/- NABAIL No. 1170 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench