HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1055 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The second anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 218 of 2013, under Section 364 of IPC, Police Station Madhoganj, District Hardoi. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the first bail application was rejected only on the basis that the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. was issued. He argued that in fact the proceeding under Section 82 was not undertaken as per the provision prescribed in Cr.P.C. He submitted that no summon or non-bailable warrant has ever been served upon the applicant and this fact has preferably been mentioned in paragraph 24 of this application. He also submitted that the applicant is a government employee and has cooperated in the investigation and never absconded and he undertakes that he will always remain present before the trial court as and when required. He also added that in fact the chargesheet has been filed and there is no possibility that he would not cooperate in the investigation proceeding. He submitted that there is no cogent evidence against him and the missing person was neither traced nor his dead body is recovered yet and, therefore, there is a bleak chances of the conviction of the present applicant. 4. Concluding his argument, he submits that the applicant has specifically undertakes that he will always remain present before the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shivendra S Singh Rathore, Abhishek Upadhyay, Bhavesh Chandel, Sachin Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A. Akhilesh @ Akhilesh Kumar Verma .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) trial court as and when required and would cooperate with the trial proceeding. Thus, submission is that he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has refuted the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, particularly the contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the proceeding under Section 82 has not been carried out as per the provision prescribed under the Cr.P.C. Further, this Court has also noticed that the chargesheet has been filed and there is no complaint that he has not cooperated with the investigating officer and the applicant is a government employee and there is no possibility that he would flee away from the proceeding of trial. Further, he had undertaken that he will always remain present before the trial court and cooperate with the proceeding of trial. This Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. 8. Let the present applicant- Akhilesh @ Akhilesh Kumar Verma shall be released forthwith, in case of his arrest in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an 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; ABAIL No. 1055 of 2025 2 (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. September 23, 2025 Mohd. Sharif ABAIL No. 1055 of 2025 3 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench