Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:109370 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2095 of 2025 Applicant :- Manju Yadav @ Manju Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Aman Ahsan,Shivam Yadav,Udai Bhatia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. WITH Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 10516 of 2024 Applicant :- Naval Kishor @ Naval Verma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Abhishek Kumar Shukla,G.A.,Ram Ashish Pandey Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. List revised. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for first informant, 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. 184 of 2024, under Sections 420, 406, 506, 306 I.P.C., Police Station Civil Lines, District Etawah, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. Vide order dated 01.04.2025 and 25.10.2024, co-ordinate Bench of this Court had granted anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have an apprehension that they may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. Learned counsel further submits that there is nothing on record to connect the applicants in commission of alleged offence and that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that no coercive process has been issued against the applicants so far. It was also submitted that applicants undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for first informant have opposed the application for anticipatory bail. Learned A.G.A. has produced a copy of the charge sheet 28.04.2025, which is taken on record and argued that credible evidence has been collected during the investigation against the applicants, therefore the applicants are not entitled for anticipatory bail. 6. Perusal of the record shows that the applicant was granted anticipatory bail to the applicant. Furthermore, the investigation has culminated in submission of charge sheet against the applicant.. 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. Order Date :- 9.7.2025 S.Ali Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad