HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8023 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Shri Ramesh Chandra Chaturvedi learned counsel for the applicants, Shri J.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.164 of 2023, under Sections 420, 406, 506 of IPC, Police Station Malpura, District Agra, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences under Sections 420, 406 IPC and as per law laid-down in the case of Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. and Others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2248 and pointed out that both the offences under Sections 406, 420 IPC can not be applied simultaneously, as they both are antithetical to each other. It is further submitted that the first information report has been lodged after a delay of two and half years. It is further submitted that the allegation against the applicants are that they along with one Vijay Singh (deceased) approached the first informant and demanded Rs.1,50,000/- for securing a government job to her son Chaman Babu. It is further submitted that the alleged cheque of Rs.1,50,000/- was given to co-accused Vijay Singh and no monetary transaction took place with the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicants are having no criminal history. It is also submitted that the charge sheet in this case has already been submitted. It was also submitted Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ramesh Chandra Chaturvedi, Tripti Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mahavir Singh And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) that applicants undertake to co-operate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they 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 anticipatory bail. 5. The first information report has been lodged after a delay of two and half years. It is further submitted that the allegation against the applicants are that they along with one Vijay Singh (deceased) approached the first informant and demanded Rs.1,50,000/- for securing a government job to her son Chaman Babu. It is further submitted that the alleged cheque of Rs.1,50,000/- was given to co-accused Vijay Singh and no monetary transaction took place with the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicants are having no criminal history and charge sheet in this case has already been submitted. 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, 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- Mahavir Singh and Smt. Neera Devi 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 applicants shall not tamper with evidence and that they would appear NABAIL No. 8023 of 2025 2 before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (ii) The applicants 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 applicants would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants. October 13, 2025 RKM NABAIL No. 8023 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