HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1517 of 2025 With CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11521 of 2024 With CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1421 of 2025 With CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : D.M.Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : D.M.Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : D.M.Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt. Sonam .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Smt. Aneesha .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Smt. Razia .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) BNSS No. - 1486 of 2025 With CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1542 of 2025 With CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2221 of 2025 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. As, all the anticipatory bail applications are arising out of same case crime number, therefore, all the anticipatory bail applications are being disposed NABAIL No. 1517 of 2025 2 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : D.M.Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : D.M.Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : D.M.Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt. Roobeena .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Smt Nasreen .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Smt. Aaliya Khatoon .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) off by a common order. 2. Sri Deepak Mishra, learned AGA for the State apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, instant anticipatory bail applications may be finally disposed off. 3. Heard Sri D.M. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Deepak Mishra, learned AGA for the State. 4. The present anticipatory bail applications have been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No. 147 of 2013, under Sections 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 13(1)(D) and 13(2) P.C. Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar Barabanki, District Barabanki with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail during trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submit, applicants Smt. Sonam, Smt. Aneesha, Smt. Roobeena and Smt. Aaliya Khatoon were named in the FIR but applicants Smt. Razia and Smt. Nasreen were not named in the FIR. 6. He further submits, FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2013 and as per allegations named accused misappropriated the government fund relates to Widow Pension and during investigation number of other accused have also been made accused. 7. He further submits, when the instant applications were filed then investigation was pending but now charge-sheet has been filed. 8. He further submits, after considering the entire facts of the case in detail the coordinate Bench of this Court was pleased to enlarge the applicants on interim anticipatory bail vide orders dated 04.03.2025, 08.01.2025, 06.03.2025, 21.03.2025, 20.02.2025 and 11.03.2025 respectively and there is no allegation that applicants misused the liberty granted to them. 9. He further submits, applicants are ladies and apart from the present case they are not having any criminal history to their credit and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no need of their custodial interrogation. 10. He further submits, considering the above facts, the interim anticipatory bail granted to them may be confirmed and applicants may be permitted to remain on anticipatory bail till trial. 11. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but NABAIL No. 1517 of 2025 3 could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicants. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. However, as per allegation, applicants were beneficiaries and they misappropriated the public fund related to pension of widows but it reflects, during investigation when they preferred the instant anticipatory bail applications then they have been protected and coordinate Bench of this Court enlarged them on interim anticipatory bail. 14. Further, now charge-sheet has been filed and there is no allegation that during investigation they did not cooperate with the investigation. 15. Further, after submission of the charge-sheet there is no need of custodial interrogation of applicants. Further, applicants are ladies and they are not having any criminal history to their credit. 16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicants vide orders dated 04.03.2025, 08.01.2025, 06.03.2025, 21.03.2025, 20.02.2025 and 11.03.2025 respectively is hereby confirmed. The applicants- Smt. Sonam, Smt. Aneesha, Smt. Razia, Smt. Roobeena, Smt Nasreen and Smt. Aaliya Khatoon shall remain on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on the same condition as imposed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail applications are allowed. 18. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 4, 2025 AK Pandey NABAIL No. 1517 of 2025 4 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad