HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4898 of 2023 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard Sri P.K.Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for first informant, Jai Kishan Chaurasia 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. 471 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Mangalpur, District Kanpur Dehat with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. Vide order dated 31.05.2023, co-ordinate Bench of this Court had granted interim anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits the allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Learned counsel further submits that due to inadvertent mistake the land number in the sale deed has been wrongly mentioned and for its rectification, proceedings has also been initiated. Learned counsel further argued that civil suit is also pending consideration. Learned counsel further argued that there is no credible evidence against him. It has also been submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during the trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : P.K. Singh, Shashi Kant Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Gaurav Chauhan, Mahendr Singh Jamil Khan .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for first informant have opposed the application for anticipatory bail. Learned A.G.A. further argued that credible evidence has been collected during the investigation, which has culminated in submission of charge sheet. 6. Perusal of the record shows that specific allegations have been levelled against the applicant in commission of offence. The investigating officer, during the course of investigation found the complicity of the applicant in commission of offence is supported by oral as well as documentary evidence and after collecting credible evidence against the applicant submitted charge sheet. Furthermore, in the 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, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, no case for anticipatory bail is made out. 8. Interim order, if any stands vacated. 9. The anticipatory bail application is rejected. September 22, 2025 S.Ali ABAIL No. 4898 of 2023 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad