Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88113 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3677 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajeev Jain Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Dubey,Shambhu Mani Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P.Tripathi, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. 2. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 372 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468 IPC, Police Station Malpura, District Agra. 3. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant was the owner of the alleged truck. The applicant has not forged or manipulated the registration number of the alleged truck. The alleged vehicle was released in favour of the applicant by the concerned Magistrate. During the course of investigation the applicant was granted protection by this Court vide order dated 29.09.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 13482 of 2022 (Rajeev Jain Vs. State of U.P. & others). At this stage there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Investigation has been completed. Charge sheet has been submitted. The applicant had co-operated in the investigation. The applicant has been summoned by the concerned court. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. In case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, in particular the fact, that during the course of investigation the applicant was granted protection by this Court, at this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence, charge sheet has been submitted, the applicant had co-operated in the investigation, no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 6. 6. In the event of arrest, the applicant Rajeev Jain, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on 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:- (i) the applicant shall make himself available on each date fixed in the matter 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court; (iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court. 7. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same. 8. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 Lbm/- Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad