HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1437 of 2025 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Sri Shiv Prakash Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manav Chaurasiya, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 45 of 2019, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC & 13(1)C and 8 Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station E.O.W., Sector Meerut, District Meerut, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was Principal in a school and as per allegation, she and other accused persons misappropriated the scholarship amount of the students but entire allegations made against the applicant are totally false. 4. He further submitted that as per prosecution, the alleged misappropriation was committed in the year 2010-11 but FIR was lodged in the year 2019 i.e. after eight years and more than five years have been passed since lodging the FIR but investigation of the case is still pending. 5. He further submitted that in the year 2025 when Investigating Officer started making attempt to arrest of the applicant then she filed the instant anticipatory bail application. He further submitted that after one and half decades there is no occasion to send the applicant in jail. 6. He further submitted that applicant is lady and she is not having any criminal history. 7. He further submitted that therefore, considering the above facts, applicant Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shiv Prakash Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt. Sangeeta Devi .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 8. Per contra, learned A.G.A. however, opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 9. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. However, as per allegation, being Principal of the school, applicant along with other accused persons misappropriated the scholarship amount of the students but it reflect, FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2019 with regard to misappropriation, which was committed in the year 2010-11, therefore, FIR of the present case was lodged after eight years. 11. Further, however, FIR was lodged in the year 2019 but after five years i.e. in the year 2025 it appears I.O. started making attempt to arrest the applicant. 12. Further, record also suggests that till date, investigation of the case is still pending. 13. Further, applicant is lady and she is not having any criminal history. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed. 16. In the event of arrest of the applicant, Smt. Sangeeta Devi involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:- i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; 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 previous permission of the court; NABAIL No. 1437 of 2025 2 iv. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; 17. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant. 18. 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. September 16, 2025 KK Patel NABAIL No. 1437 of 2025 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad