Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:109311 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 209 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohar Lal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satish Chandra Singh,Sharad Chandra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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. 79 of 2023 under Sections 306, 498-A I.P.C., Police Station Kathela Samay Mata, District Siddharth Nagar, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, inspite of the fact that there is no credible evidence against him. Learned counsel further submits that applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased and that his son was married with the deceased eight years back. He further submits that the ingredients of Section 306 I.P.C. is not made out against the applicant. Learned counsel further submits that there no evidence against the applicant to connect him in commission of alleged offence and that the applicant has been falsely implicated on merely on the ground that his the father in law of the deceased. It has further been submitted that applicant undertakes to co- operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail. 5. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court after issuing notice to the opposite party no. 2 had granted interim anticipatory bail to the applicant. 6. It may be stated that in 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, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 8. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 9. In the event of arrest of the applicant Mohar Lal involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court subject to the following conditions :- i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every dates fixed. iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 10. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law. Order Date :- 9.7.2025 S.Ali Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad