HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1799 of 2025 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Sri Shakil Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ghanshyam Mishra, learned Brief Holder for the State-respondent. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No.29 of 2019, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC and Sections 8, 13(1)(c) Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station - E.O.W., District - Meerut, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was Assistant Teacher in a school and as per allegations, he along with other accused misappropriated the scholarship amount of the students but entire allegations levelled against the applicant are totally false. 4. He further submits that FIR of the present case was lodged in the month of July, 2019 with regard to the alleged embezzlement which is said to have been taken place in the year 2010-11, therefore, it appears, there is delay of eight years in lodging the FIR of the present case. 5. He next submits that however more than six years have been passed from the date of lodging of the FIR but investigation of the case is still pending and therefore, after six years of the FIR, there is no occasion to send the applicant behind the bar. 6. He further submits that therefore, considering the above facts, applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail . Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shakil Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Abrar Alam .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. however, opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 8. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. However, as per allegations, applicant who was Assistant Teacher in a school and he along with others misappropriated the scholarship amount of the students but it reflects that FIR of the present case was lodged after eight years. 10. Further, FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2019 but it reflects that till date investigation of the case is still pending. Considering this fact and observation made by Apex Court in case of Gursewak Singh Vs. State of Punjab [Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.11234 of 2025] dated 03.09.2025, this Court finds merit in the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that after so many years, there is no occasion to arrest the applicant. 11. 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. 12. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed. 13. In the event of arrest of the applicant, Abrar Alam 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; iv. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; NABAIL No. 1799 of 2025 2 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; 14. 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. 15. 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 24, 2025 Zafar NABAIL No. 1799 of 2025 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad