HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8713 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Himanshu Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri 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 Complaint Case no. 35562 of 2024 under Sections 420, 120-B IPC, Police Station Mahavan, District Mathura with the prayer that in the event of arrest, the applicant may be released on bail. 3. It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been summoned to face trial for offence under sections 420 and 120-B IPC in Complaint Case no. 35562 of 2024. It is further submitted that allegations in the complaint is that the applicant gave false statement and obtained a plot knowing fully well that she was not eligible to get the said allotment. It is further submitted that government authority has also filed a complaint against her and the present complaint has been filed only to wreck vengeance on the applicant who is an old lady of 75 years. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and she would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court and in case she is granted anticipatory bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Himanshu Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Anto .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. As per the allegations in the complaint, applicant is said to have given a false statement on the basis of which, she obtained allotment of a plot in her favour. 7. 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, the Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedents of the accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate the entire available material against the accused carefully and the exact role of accused has also to be taken into consideration. 8. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, 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. 9. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 10. In the event of arrest of the applicant Anto involved in the aforesaid case crime, she shall be released on anticipatory bail on her 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 liberty of bail. NABAIL No. 8713 of 2025 2 (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 11. 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 29, 2025 Madhurima NABAIL No. 8713 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad