HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 17575 of 2021 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Sri Rahul Srivastava, learned counsel for C.B.I. apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, instant anticipatory bail application may be finally disposed off. 2. Heard Sri S.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rahul Srivastava, learned counsel for C.B.I. 3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in R.C. No. 2192017E0017, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) P.C. Act, Police Station CBI/SPE/EO-1 New Delhi, District Ghaziabad with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail during trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is a private person and on the basis of false allegation he has been made accused in the present matter along with several others but even during investigation he has not been arrested by the C.B.I. although he fully cooperated with the investigation. 5. He further submits, after submission of the charge-sheet when applicant filed instant anticipatory bail application then after considering the entire facts of the case in detail the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.12.2021 was pleased to enlarge him on interim anticipatory bail and there is no allegation that applicant is not co-operating with the trial and pursuant to the order passed by this Court applicant is continuously attending the trial court either in person or through his counsel. 6. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history. 7. He further submits, therefore, considering the above facts, the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant vide order dated 16.12.2021 may be confirmed. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for C.B.I. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhinav Mishra, Santosh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Rahul Srivastava, Sanjay Kumar Yadav Hariom Sharma .....Applicant(s) C.B.I. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. However, as per allegation, applicant and others committed the fraud and forgery but during investigation he has not been arrested by the C.B.I. though he fully cooperated with the investigation. 11. Record further suggests that when after investigation charge-sheet was filed then thereafter applicant filed instant anticipatory bail application before this Court and after considering the entire fact of the case in detail, the co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 16.12.2021 enlarged him on interim anticipatory bail and since then he is on interim anticipatory bail and there is no allegation that he misused the liberty granted to him by this Court and even as per instruction of learned counsel for C.B.I. applicant is continuously attending the trial court either in person or through counsel. 12. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history. 13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant vide order dated 16.12.2021 is hereby confirmed. The applicant- Hariom Sharma shall remain on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on the same condition as imposed by this Court vide order dated 16.12.2021. 14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed. 15. 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. September 23, 2025 AK Pandey ABAIL No. 17575 of 2021 2 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad