HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8136 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashish Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 343 of 2025, under Sections 303 (2) B.N.S., Police Station Gajraula, District Amroha with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case. It is further contended by the learned counsel for applicant that first information report has been lodged against the unknown person. During the investigation two accused persons namely Fariyad and Arbaj have already been granted bail by the learned Trial Court. He further submits that no offence is made out against the applicant as per first information report. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has submitted that during the investigation two accused persons Fariyad and Arbaj have been arrested and the name of the applicant has surfaced in their confessional statement. It is also submitted by the learned A.G.A. that the stolen articles were sold by the accused persons and all the accused persons have received the shares after selling of stolen articles. 5. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. As per first information report, the applicant is not named in the first information report, his name has surfaced on the confessional statement of co-accused Fariyad and Arbaj, who have already been granted bail by the learned Trial Court. There is one criminal history of the applicant, which is explained in paragraph no. 16 of the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jitendra Kumar, Santosh Kumar Singh, Vishal Kumar Sonkar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sharik .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) anticipatory bail. 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, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 8. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the 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- Sharik involved in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his 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 cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (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 herein. October 7, 2025 Neetu NABAIL No. 8136 of 2025 2 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- NEETU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad