HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1742 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No-292/2024, U/S 316(5), 316(2) of BNS, 2023 r/w 66-D of IT Act, P.S-Masauli, District Barabanki. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that certain employees working at the Shahpur Toll Plaza were involved in theft by using an illegal mobile application, thereby causing financial loss to the toll plaza. During an audit conducted by the company, the involvement of the accountant, Rahul Yadav, came to light, as the misappropriated funds were allegedly transferred to his Union Bank of India account. It is further alleged that other accused persons were summoned to the head office but absconded on the way. The applicant is stated to be the main accused, having served as the plaza manager at the toll plaza. In support of the allegations, the bank passbook, the statement of co-accused Rahul Yadav, and the confessional statements of Rahul Yadav and Siddharth Singh have been annexed. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that co-accused Jitendra Yadav, who was working as a Supervisor, has already been granted anticipatory bail by the court below, as reflected in Annexure No. 6 to the bail application. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Satya Prakash Mishra, Satya Prakash Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pushp Dant Tiwari .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that if the accused is granted anticipatory bail, he undertakes to comply with all conditions imposed by the Court. He shall fully cooperate with the investigation and shall not misuse the liberty granted to him. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application; however, he has not been able to demonstrate from the record that any amount was received in the applicant’s bank account. Considering the anticipatory bail order of co-accused Jitendra Yadav; the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents; the offences being triable by a Magistrate; the absence of any monetary transaction in the applicant’s account; and the undertaking given on his behalf to cooperate with the investigation, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and Others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and Another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, subject to his cooperation in the investigation." In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid Case Crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned with the following conditions:- The applicant shall report to the investigating officer within twenty days from today. He shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. The application is allowed. November 17, 2025 R.C. NABAIL No. 1742 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench