Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11949 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2771 of 2024 Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Awasthi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Singh Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Case called out in the revised list. Neither the counsel for the applicant nor the counsel for the opposite party no.2/complainant are present. Heard learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 45 of 2019, under sections 420, 467, 468, 504 and 506 of IPC P.S.- Baskhari District -Ambedkar Nagar. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 18.12.2024, 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 bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 45 of 2019, under sections 420, 467, 468, 504 and 506 of IPC P.S.- Baskhari District -Ambedkar Nagar. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that by way of lodging the first information report, the matter of civil in nature is being given colour of criminality. He further submits that in fact the applicant was never involved in committing offence and he has a case criminal history which has been explained in paragraph no. 22 of the anticipatory bail application. He submits that the applicant is cooperating in the investigation proceedings and undertakes that he will always cooperate in the investigation proceedings as well as in the trial proceedings. He also submits that there is apprehension that the applicant will be arrested by the police thus, submission is that the the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the submissions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is involved in committed offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, till the next date of listing, the present applicant- Vijay Kumar shall be released forthwith, in case of his arrest 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. Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2, returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. If steps are taken, office shall proceed accordingly. List/put up this matter in fourth week of January, 2025. In the meantime, the State as well as opposite party no. 2 may file their counter affidavits.” 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, Vinay Kumar 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 :- 27.2.2025 Shravan Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench