Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:14552 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2314 of 2024 Applicant :- Rajendra Prasad Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present application under Section 438 Cr.PC./482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 898 of 2021, under sections 409 of IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Sultanpur. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 16.10.2024, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- “Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant application under section 438 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 898 of 2021, under sections 409 of IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Sultanpur. Contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicant had been retired on 31.12.2020 and he is suffering with several diseases. He submits that at the time of his retirement he wrote several letters to the authorities concerned so that the charge could be handed over to the person concerned, but Brij Bahadur Bharti (Head Moharir) who took over the charge, did not accept the charge from the present applicant and as such the present situation has arisen. He further submits that there is no criminal intent to commit any offence, but the same has happened because of the denial of taking charge by the present Head Moharir. In support of his contentions, he has shown several letters which has been appended alongwith the anticipatory bail application thus, submission is that the present applicant may be granted anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that he has no instructions though, the fact remains that the applicant has previous criminal antecedent and he has committed offence as is evident from the first information report. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court find it to be a fit case of anticipatory bail. List/put up this matter on 4.11.2024, as fresh. Till the next date of listing, the present applicant- Rajendra Prasad Pandey shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with 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 in case chargesheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. Learned A.G.A. for the State shall seek detailed instructions in this matter.” State counsel has failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavit that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough 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, Rajendra Prasad Pandey 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