Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89348 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8281 of 2024 Applicant :- Dwigesh Bharatbhai Joshi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Shukla,Shad Khan,Shishir Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- Aditya Gupta,G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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 Case Crime no. 76 of 2024, under Sections 406, 420, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Swaroop Nagar, District Central Commissionerate, Kanpur Nagar, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on anticipatory bail. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that vide order dated 12.09.2024, the applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail till the next of listing or till the submission of police report. There is no credible evidence against the applicant. It has further been submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedents. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to cooperate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the 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 proceeding of trial and would obey all conditions of bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the application for anticipatory bail and argued that in this matter charge sheet has been filed on 27.10.2024, therefore, applicant does not deserve any indulgence, at this stage. 5. 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. 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. 8. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. Order Date :- 26.5.2025 Mustaqeem. Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad