Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:32691 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6977 of 2024 Applicant :- Gyanendra Chaudhary @ Gyani Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rohan Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No. 347 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 325, 307, 427, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Loni, District- Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Instant first information has been lodged in the year 2019 against five named accused persons and unknown persons alleging therein that accused persons entered in the Firm and assaulted security personnel and broke boundary wall. He next submitted that earlier applicant was granted anticipatory bail till submission of police report by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.07.20219 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 27738 of 2019. Applicant has co-operated with the investigation. Thereafter, Investigating Officer has submitted charge-sheet in the year 2020 and Court concerned vide order dated 13.07.2020 issued summons against the applicant. He further submitted that applicant had no knowledge regarding summons issued against him. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant is apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the trial proceedings. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application of the applicant and submitted that applicant is named in the first information report and during investigation, Investigating Officer has collected sufficient evidence against the applicant. It is not a case of false implication. Moreover, applicant has not co-operated with the trial since last four years as summons were issued against him on 13.07.2020. Further, bailable warrants have been issued against the applicant. Hence, applicant should not be released on anticipatory bail. 5. Considered the submissions raised by learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record. From perusal of record, it is apparent that summons have been issued against the applicant vide order dated 13.07.2020 and applicant had knowledge regarding lodging of first information report and he was earlier granted anticipatory bail till submission of police report. It cannot be presumed that applicant had no knowledge regarding issuance of summons and applicant deliberately avoided the summons, as such, no case for interference by this Court is made out. 6. Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application is rejected. 7. However, if the applicant surrenders before the concerned court within three weeks from today and applies for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the court concerned, in accordance with law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another; reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922. 8. For the period of three weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Aditya Digitally signed by :- ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad