Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87393 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5811 of 2024 Applicant :- Kailash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Birendra Singh Khokher 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. 50 of 2024, under Sections 306, 406, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Afzalgarh, District Bijnor, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that prior to submission of charge, the applicant had filed Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2504 of 2024 (Kailash Vs. State of U.P. and others) in which interim protection was granted by co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.03.2024. Thereafter the aforesaid application finally came up for consideration before this Court on 08.05.2024 and the same was disposed of vide order dated 08.05.2024 by which, protection was granted till submission of charge sheet. Learned counsel next submits that thereafter charge sheet was filed and again the applicant moved anticipatory bail, which rejected by the trial Court and now the applicant is before this Court. Learned counsel further argued that there is no credible evidence against him. It has also been submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedents and the applicant undertakes to co-operate during the 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. 5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the anticipatory bail and argued that credible evidence has been collected during the investigation, which has culminated in submission of charge sheet and therefore the applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. 6. In the 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, no case for anticipatory bail is made out. 8. Interim order, if any stands vacated. 9. The anticipatory bail application is rejected. Order Date :- 22.5.2025 S.Ali Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad