Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:47224 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2259 of 2025 Applicant :- Hariom Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Dr. S. B. Maurya, learned AGA-I apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, the instant anticipatory bail application may be finally, disposed off. 2. Heard Sri Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S. B. Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State-respondent. 3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 307 of 2016, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, Police Station Barsana, District Mathura, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, till the conclusion of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this is second anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and first anticipatory bail application of the applicant was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 6.2.2024 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 466 of 2024 after considering the fact that applicant even after summons failed to appear before the court concerned but he filed the instant second anticipatory bail application on the ground that after rejection of the first anticipatory bail application of the applicant when co-accused Mahendra and Bhupan challenged the chargesheet and summoning order passed against them in Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 24257 of 2024 then this Court on 21.9.2024 was pleased to stay the proceedings of the case till further orders and order passed by this Court has been annexed at page 67 of the paper book. 5. He further submitted that as proceedings of the case with regard to two other co-accused have already been stayed by this Court, therefore, anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant should be allowed. 6. He further submitted that applicant is having no previous criminal history to his credit and he is having apprehension that if he will appear before the court concerned then he will be sent to jail. 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that first anticipatory bail application of the applicant has already been dismissed by this Court but could not dispute the fact that after dismissal of first anticipatory bail application of the applicant, proceeding with regard to two other co-accused have already been stayed by this Court. 8. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any previous criminal history. 9. I have heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the record of the case. 10. However, this is second anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the applicant but it reflects, after rejection of the first anticipatory bail application of the applicant, proceedings with regard to other two co-accused persons have already been stayed by this Court. 11. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and apprehension of arrest/custody raised by the applicant, cannot be ruled out. 12. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in this case, till conclusion of trial. 13. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. 14. In the event of arrest of the applicant-Hariom, involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till 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; 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; 15. 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. 16. 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. Order Date :- 3.4.2025 Ankita Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad