Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:4607 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 11992 of 2024 Applicant :- Manoj Verma And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicants for enlarging them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No 338 of 2022, under Sections 406, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Rajghat, District Gorakhpur. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive; Offence U/s 406 I.P.C. is not made out. Investigating Officer has submitted charge sheet in the year 2023. After issuance of summon and bailable warrant, applicants came to know about pendency of the proceedings. It is further submitted that the applicants are apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they 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 there is direct allegation against the applicants. Statement of the victim has supported the prosecution case. Trial court vide order dated 01.04.2023 issued summons against the applicants but applicants did not appear before the trial court. Applicants have filed this present anticipatory bail after about nine months. Applicants have willfully avoided trial proceedings. The applicants are not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants may be rejected. 5. The object of anticipatory bail 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 applicants in the aforesaid case. 8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. Order Date :- 9.1.2025 Nitin Verma Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad