HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 832 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Shri Mulayam Singh Yadav, the learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Mayank Sinha, the learned AGA for the State. 2. On 18.08.2025, after hearing learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State, this Court had passed the following order: "1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Vijayendra Prakash Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Ashok Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records. 3. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.138 of 2025, under Sections 316(2), 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 352 B.N.S., registered at Police Station Kotwali Dhanepur, District Gonda. 4. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged by the complainant/opposite party no.2 on 30.05.2025, stating that in the name of getting the complainant employed in Health Department, the applicant extracted Rs. 1,84,000/- from him and he gave an appointment letter, which was fake. 5. The learned A.G.A has pointed out involvement of the applicant in another criminal case. A supplementary affidavit has been filed by the applicant stating that the other case related to Section 13 of The Public Gambling Act, 1867, in which the applicant has been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 300/-, which was deposited in the year 2015 and the matter stands closed. 6. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that as per the F.I.R allegations, the complainant himself tried to secure public employment through illegal means and the F.I.R has been lodged after he failed in his endeavor; that the complainant has requested in the F.I.R that his amount of Rs. 1,84,000/- be returned to him, which appears to be essentially of a civil nature, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted interim anticipatory bail in the matter. 7. Issue notice to the opposite party no.2 returnable at an early date. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mulayam Singh Yadav, Vijayendra Prakash Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A. Rakesh Kumar Verma .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 8. The learned counsel for the applicant shall take requisite steps for issuance of notice within a period of one week. 9. Opposite party may file counter affidavit within a period of three weeks'. 10. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within a period of one week thereafter. 11. List this case in the week commencing 06.10.2025. 12. Therefore, it is directed that in the event of arrest/appearance of applicant- Rakesh Kumar Verma before the learned Trial Court till the next date of listing, he shall be released on interim anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime on his furnishing personal bail bond and two solvent sureties to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court:- (i). That the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (ii). That 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii). That the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv). That the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; " 3. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of material collected during investigation. 4. The learned AGA did not point out any violation of the conditions of interim anticipatory bail by the applicant. Nothing has come to light which may persuade this Court to take a view, other than the view taken at the time of granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant. 5. In view of above, the interim order dated 18.08.2025 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed in terms of the aforesaid interim order. October 6, 2025 -Amit K- NABAIL No. 832 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench