HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2145 of 2024 Court No. - 73 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Sri Ashutosh Singh, learned AGA for the State apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, instant anticipatory bail application may be finally disposed off. 2. Heard Sri Vipin Gangwar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashutosh Singh, learned AGA for the State. 3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 2911 of 2007, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Bareilly with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail during trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2007 and applicant was not named in the FIR and entire allegation was against co-accused Rakesh Gangwar that he by putting forged signature of the informant withdrew the amount through cheques but during investigation applicant has been made accused on the ground that he was contractor and some cheque amount has been withdrawn by him but entire allegation leveled against the applicant is totally false. 5. He further submits, till date there is no evidence which can suggests that the amount which was withdrawn by the applicant was withdrawn by forged cheque. 6. He further submits, however, Investigating Officer without arrest of the applicant submitted charge-sheet in the present matter but court concerned Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vipin Gangwar, Vipin Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Virendra Pal Gangwar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) returned the charge-sheet and till date charge-sheet in the present matter has not been filed in the Court. 7. He further submits, there is no occasion to send the applicant behind bar after 15 years from the date of lodgment of the FIR of the present case. He further submits, considering the facts of the case, possibility of arrest of the applicant cannot be ruled out. 8. He further submits, even instant anticipatory bail application is pending since the year 2024, therefore, considering the facts of the case applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. From the record, it reflects, FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2007 against co-accused Rakesh Gangwar but it reflects, during investigation applicant has been made accused. 12. Considering the facts of the case this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for applicant that after 15 years there is no occasion to send the applicant behind the Bar specially considering the fact that charge-sheet in the present matter has not been filed in the court although it reflects, Investigating Officer has completed the investigation with regard to the applicant. 13. Further, applicant 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- Virendra Pal Gangwar 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 ABAIL No. 2145 of 2024 2 the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions:- i. 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; ii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court; iii. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; v. 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. October 8, 2025 AK Pandey ABAIL No. 2145 of 2024 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad