Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:29124 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1726 of 2025 Applicant :- Virendra Tiwari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Mishra,G.A.,Vijay Pratap Singh Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicant for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No.86 of 2018, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Industrial Area, District Allahabad. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant is not named in the FIR. Applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. Learned counsel for the applicant next submits that co-accused Pragya Nand Tripathi @ Pragyan Tripathi has been granted anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial by coordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 28.08.2024. Applicant's case is similar with co-accused who has been granted anticipatory bail. It is submitted that the applicant is apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation. 4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that despite notice under section 41-A Cr.P.C. the applicant has not appeared before the Investigating Officer, therefore, Investigating Officer has taken coercive measure and moved application before concerned court to issue non-bailable warrant against the applicant. Concerned court has issued non- bailable warrant against the applicant. Applicant is not cooperated with the investigation. The applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant may be rejected. 5. The object of Section 482 B.N.S. is that a person should not be unnecessarily harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy personal vendetta or grudge of complainant or any other person operating the things directly or from behind the curtains. 6. It is well settled that discretionary power conferred by the legislature on this Court cannot be put in a straitjacket formula but such discretionary power either grant or refusal of anticipatory bail has to be exercised carefully in appropriate cases with circumspection on the basis of the available material after evaluating the facts of the particular case and considering other relevant factors (nature and gravity of accusation, role attributed to accused, conduct of accused, criminal antecedents, possibility of the applicant to flee from justice, apprehension of tempering of the witnesses or threat to the complainant, impact of grant of anticipatory bail in investigation or society etc.) with meticulous precision maintaining balance between the conflicting interest, namely, sanctity of individual liberty and interest of society. 7. Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case and considering the submissions advanced, the nature and gravity of the accusation, I find no good ground for anticipatory bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case. 8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant- Virendra Tiwari, involved in aforesaid case crime is, hereby, rejected. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 SKD Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad