Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10790 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 150 of 2024 Applicant :- Sushila Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Singh Chauhan,Hanumant Lal Yadav 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 on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0318 of 2024, under Section 3/4 of D.P. Act and Section 127(2), 115(2), 351(2), 76, 85 of BNS, 2023, Police Station Kadipur, District Sultanpur. The notice has been issued to opposite party no. 2 and as per office report, the same has been served upon opposite party no. 2 personally but no one is present on behalf of the complainant/opposite party no. 2. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 21.11.2024, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0318 of 2024, under section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, & sections 127(2),115(2),351(2),76, 85 of B.N.S.,2023, Police Station-Kadipur, District-Sultanpur. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated. He added that the applicant is a woman of 67 years of age and she is Mother-in-law and she was never involved in committing any offence. He next added that the general allegations have been levelled against the applicant and no specific role has been assigned. He submits that the specific role has been assigned to one, Ajay, who is Devar, and thus, the role of the present applicant is distinguishable from the role of Ajay. He next submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and there is an acute apprehension that the police will arrest her and such,she may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court finds it a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail. Accordingly, till the next date of listing, the present applicant- Sushila, shall be released forthwith, in case of her arrest, in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on her furnishing a 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 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 her 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. Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. If the steps are taken, the office shall proceed accordingly. List/put up this matter in the Second Week of January,2025. In the meantime, learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no. 2 shall file their counter affidavits." From perusal of the order dated 21.11.2024, it transpires that the 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, Sushila till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make 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 her 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 protection. Order Date :- 18.2.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench