HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7102 of 2025 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA-I for the State apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, instant anticipatory bail application may be finally disposed off. 2. Heard Sri Chandra Prakash Pal, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA-I for the State. 3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 260 of 2012, under Sections 120B IPC and Section 13(1)D, 13(2) P.C. Act, Police Station Naini, District Allahabad with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail during trial. 4. Learned counsel for applicants submits, FIR of the present case was lodged against applicants and others in the year 2012 with the allegation that being public servant they misappropriated the government money but entire allegations leveled against them are totally false. 5. He further submits, during investigation after considering the entire facts of the case applicants have been released on regular bail in the present matter for offences under Section 409 IPC but charge-sheet has also been filed against applicants for offences under Sections 120B IPC and 13(1)D and 13(2) P.C. Act. 6. He further submits, when applicants filed anticipatory bail application before the court concerned for offences under Sections 120B IPC and 13(1)D and 13(2) P.C. Act then their anticipatory bail applications have been dismissed by the court concerned. He next submits, however, similarly placed co-accused have been released on anticipatory bail by the court concerned even for offences under Sections 120B IPC and 13(1)D and 13(2) P.C. Act. 7. He further submits, there is no allegation that during investigation applicants while Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chandra Prakash Pal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ram Murti Mishra And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) on bail misused the liberty granted to them. He further submits, even from the record, it reflects, principal offence in the present matter is offence under Section 409 IPC and as in the principal offence applicant has already been released on bail, therefore, for added offences under Sections 120B IPC and 13(1)D and 13(2) P.C. Act they may be released on anticipatory bail. 8. He further submits, applicants are having apprehension that if they will appear before the court concerned then they will be sent to jail. He further submits, applicants have already retired from service and they are not having any criminal history. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicants. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. However, as per allegation, applicants and others who were public servants misappropriated the public fund but it reflects, initially they were challaned only for offence under Section 409 IPC and during investigation they have been released on bail in the present matter for offence under Section 409 IPC but it reflects, charge- sheet has also filed for offences under Sections 120B IPC and 13(1)D and 13(2) P.C. Act. 12. Considering the fact that after considering the entire facts of the case in detail applicants were enlarged on bail in the present matter for offence under Section 409 IPC, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for applicants that they can be released on anticipatory bail for added offences under Sections 120B IPC and 13(1)D and 13(2) P.C. Act. 13. Further, similarly placed five co-accused M.A. Siddiqui, Rajdev Yadav, Premchandra, Ashok Kumar and R.P. Mishra have been released on anticipatory bail even by the court concerned for offence under Sections 120B IPC and 13(1)D and 13(2) P.C. Act. 14. Further, applicants have already retired from service and they are not having any criminal history. Further, apprehension of arrest raised by the applicants cannot be ruled out. 15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed. 17. In the event of arrest of the applicants- Ram Murti Mishra and B.K. Das NABAIL No. 7102 of 2025 2 (Bhabotosh Kumar Das) involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions:- i. that the applicants 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; ii. that the applicants shall not leave India without previous permission of the court; iii. that the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; iv. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; v. that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; 18. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicants. 19. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 1, 2025 AK Pandey NABAIL No. 7102 of 2025 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad