HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 6612 of 2025 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Jai Kishan Chaurasiya, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the record. 2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No. 7258 of 2016, under Sections 302, 120B I.P.C., Police Station Gangoh, District Saharanpur, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second anticipatory bail application moved on behalf of applicant. Earlier the applicant approached this Court by filing anticipatory bail application prior to filing of charge sheet and this Court vide order dated 23.10.2024 granted anticipatory bail application to the applicant till the submission of charge sheet, but vide order dated 28.07.2025 the said anticipatory bail application was dismissed for want of prosecution. Now charge sheet has been filed against the applicant. Learned counsel further submits that there is no credible evidence against the applicant. It has also been submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedents and the applicant undertakes to cooperate 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 cooperate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and submits that as per the order sheet of the trial the applicant is not appearing regularly before the court concerned and he is not cooperating with the trial, thus he has misused the conditions imposed upon him while granting anticipatory bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raj Kumar Vaishya, Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Lalit Mittal .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Perusal of record shows that vide order dated 23.10.2024 the applicant was granted anticipatory bail subject to the condition mentioned in the order was granted, in which one of the condition was to the effect that the applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and the trial. Now charge sheet has been submitted wherein credible evidence has been found against him. Moreover, as per the order sheet of the trial court the applicant is not appearing regularly before the trial court, thus, he has violated the conditions of anticipatory bail and is misusing the liberty of bail. 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. 6. 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. 7. The anticipatory bail application is rejected, leaving it open to the applicant to move regular bail before the court concerned, if he so chooses. 8. Interim order, if any stands vacated. September 15, 2025 Mustaqeem. NABAIL No. 6612 of 2025 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad