HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7945 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Shri Vipin Gangwar, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri B.P. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no.286 of 2019, under Section 420 of IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Bareilly, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that as per first information report, the applicant is said to have been assigned the role of getting the official documents delivered to wrong place, thereby assisting the real beneficiary of the fraudulent act, i.e. Firoz Khan. It is further submitted that initially, the first information report was lodged under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC against the applicant and other co-accused persons but the charge sheet has been submitted under Section 420 IPC against the applicant only. It is further submitted that the applicant is having criminal history in the year 2007 but the record of the said case are not available and the same has not been explained. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vipin Gangwar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Meghnath .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and it has been submitted by him that the non-bailable warrants were issued against the applicant in the year 2023. 5. Initially, the first information report was lodged under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC against the applicant and other co-accused persons but the charge sheet has been submitted under Section 420 IPC against the applicant only. It is further submitted that the applicant is having criminal history in the year 2007 but the record of the said case are not available and the same has not been explained. 6. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 7. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 8. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 9. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Meghnath, involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (ii) 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the NABAIL No. 7945 of 2025 2 liberty of bail. (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 10. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. October 30, 2025 RKM NABAIL No. 7945 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad