HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1218 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Shri Suneel Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant as well as Shri Mohd. Arif Khan, learned A.G.A.-I appearing on behalf of the State and Shri Baljeet Singh, learned counsel for the complainant. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No.0237 of 2025, under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 351(2), 352 B.N.S., registered at Police Station-P.G.I., District- Lucknow. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 24.05.2025 against the sole accused person Rahul Yadav stating that the named accused persons is the CMD of Jairani Infra Bold Pvt. Ltd. Company; that the informant had made investments in the company but no benefit was returned to him. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely been implicated in the present case subsequently as he was also one of the Director of the company. It is further been stated in the affidavit that the complainant has entered into a settlement with the applicant under which he has been returned his amount. 5. The complainant has filed a short counter affidavit admitting the fact of compromise and learned counsel for the complainant stated that the complainant does not wish to oppose the anticipatory bail application. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Suneel Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pramod Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 6. The learned A.G.A.-I has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and he has submitted that the investigation in the matter is still going on. 7. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the F.I.R. was lodged alleging non return of investments made in the company and the applicant was not named in the FIR; that the applicant being a Director has returned the amount of the complainant and the complainant has entered into a settlement coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, 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 before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on bail on 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/herself 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. September 10, 2025 S. Shivhare NABAIL No. 1218 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench