HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 15716 of 2021 Court No. - 73 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA for the State. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No.82B/2006, under Sections 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201, 218, 120B/34 IPC, & 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Ubhaon, District Ballia with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail during trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2006 with the allegation that applicant and other accused misappropriated the pubic fund related to Sampurn Gramin Rozgar Yojna but entire allegation levelled against the applicant, who was Project Director, are totally false. He next submits that however, FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2006 but immediately, thereafter, I.O. did not make any attempt to arrest the applicant but when in the year 2021, he tried to arrest the applicant, then applicant filed instant anticipatory bail application before this court and vide order dated 03.03.2025, he is on interim anticipatory bail granted by co-ordinate bench of this court. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Santosh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Lakshmi Narayan Chaudhary @ Lakshmi Nath Chaudhary .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 4. He further submits that even till date investigation of the case could not be completed and no charge-sheet has been filed. He further submits that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of 17 other cases but in all the cases, he has been made accused with similar allegation. He further submits that considering the above facts of the case, interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant may be confirmed. 6. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 8. However, as per allegation, applicant was Project Director and he along with other public servant misappropriated the public fund related to Smpurn Gramin Rozgar Yojna but it reflects that FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2006 and till date investigation of the case is pending. 9. Further, pursuant to the order dated 03.03.2025 passed by this Court, applicant is on interim anticipatory bail and there is no allegation that he misused the liberty granted to him. 10. Further, however apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of 17 other cases but in all the cases with similar allegation, he has been made accused 11. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant vide order dated 03.03.2025 is hereby confirmed. The applicant- Lakshmi Narayan Chaudhary @ Lakshmi Nath Chaudhary shall remain on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on the same condition as imposed by this Court vide order dated 03.03.2025. 12. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed. ABAIL No. 15716 of 2021 2 13. 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. October 10, 2025 S.A. ABAIL No. 15716 of 2021 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- SALMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad