HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2110 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri S.D. Shukla, 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. 1118 of 2007 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Civil Lines, District Budaun with the prayer that in the event of arrest, the applicant may be released on bail. 3. It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that allegation in the FIR is that the applicant submitted a caste certificate even though he does not belong to Scheduled Caste community. It is submitted that the said caste certificate has been issued by competent authority and the same has not been cancelled so far. It was also submitted that applicant was adopted by a person belonging to Scheduled Caste community on which basis, the said caste certificate has been issued in his favour. It is submitted that applicant had earlier approached this Court by filing application u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. No. 16511 of 2010 in which he was granted interim protection vide order dated 15.6.2010. It was also submitted that the aforesaid application is still pending before this Court. It is further submitted that on the basis of the judgment of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited & Anr. v. Central Bureau of Investigation, the trial court issued summons, thereafter, non bailable warrants against the applicant, therefore, he is apprehending his arrest. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court and in case he is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Gaidalal .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and submits that the applicant should file an application in the proceedings u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. already filed by him which is still pending before this Court. 5. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. As per the FIR, the allegation against the applicant is that he submitted a caste certificate even though he does not belong to Scheduled Caste community. It is submitted that the said caste certificate has been issued by competent authority and the same has not been cancelled so far. The applicant moved this Court earlier by filing application u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. in which, he was granted interim protection and the said application is still pending. In the meantime, following the judgment of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited & Anr. v. Central Bureau of Investigation, trial court issued non bailable arrant against the applicant. 7. 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, the Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedents of the accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate the entire available material against the accused carefully and the exact role of accused has also to be taken into consideration. 8. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of 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 merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 9. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 10. In the event of arrest of the applicant Gaidalal involved in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his 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 :- NABAIL No. 2110 of 2025 2 (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (ii) 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 11. 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 applicant. October 9, 2025 Madhurima NABAIL No. 2110 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad