HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8792 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Vimal Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manoj Gautam, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. Present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 311 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, Police Station Kaushambi, District Ghaziabad 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 she has an apprehension that she may be arrested in the above-mentioned case. He further submits that no offence is made out against the applicant and she has been falsely implicated and the first information report has been lodged after a delay of 7 years. It is further submitted that co-accused Smt. Punam Sharma has already been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.11.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 482 BNSS No. 10416 of 2024. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and she would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she 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) : Atul Kumar Pandey, Vimal Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt Vijay Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) anticipatory bail, however, he does not dispute the fact that the case of the applicant is not distinguishable from the case of the co-accused Smt. Punam Sharma who has already been granted anticipatory bai. 5. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. First information report has been lodged after a delay of 7 years. Co- accused Smt. Punam Sharma has already been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.11.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 482 BNSS No. 10416 of 2024 and the investigation of the case is still in progress. 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- Smt Vijay Singh involved in the aforesaid case crime, she shall be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned till submission of the police report under Section 173(2) CrPC/193(3) B.N.S.S. with the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that she would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the NABAIL No. 8792 of 2025 2 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 29, 2025 Abhishek NABAIL No. 8792 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad