HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8168 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Shri Vinod Kumar Bind, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri O.P. Singh, 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. 214 of 2025, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 392, 406 of IPC, Police Station Manduadih, District Varanasi, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has falsely implicated in the present case. It it further submitted that a dispute of account has been given a colour of criminality. It is further submitted that the first information report has been lodged after a delay of one and half years. It is further submitted that Rs.66430/- was paid to the applicant by the first informant but he paid only Rs.33215/- and the dispute regarding Rs.31000/-. It is further submitted that in order to give weightage to the case, some further allegations have been levelled against the applicant that he looted Rs.75,000/- and also assaulted the first informant. It is also submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history. 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 opposed the application for Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kalp Nath, Vinod Kumar Bind Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Manoj Kushvaha .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) anticipatory bail. 5. The first information report has been lodged after a delay of one and half years. It is further submitted that Rs.66430/- was paid to the applicant by the first informant but he paid only Rs.33215/- and the dispute regarding Rs.31000/-. It is further submitted that in order to give weightage to the case, some further allegations have been levelled against the applicant that he looted Rs.75,000/- and also assaulted the first informant. It is also submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history. 6. 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, 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. 7. 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 applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 8. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 9. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Manoj Kushvaha involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on their 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 co-operate during trial and would not misuse the NABAIL No. 8168 of 2025 2 liberty of bail. (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 10. 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. October 14, 2025 RKM NABAIL No. 8168 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad