Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:21468 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 402 of 2025 Applicant :- Arif Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Irshad Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard Sri Irshad Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicant for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No 127 of 2021, under Sections 147, 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act and Section 3/4 of Muslim Women Marriage Protection Act, Police Station Mahila, District Moradabad. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive; Applicant is husband of opposite party no.2. I.O. has submitted charge sheet against the applicant. Applicant has challenged the summoning order and charge sheet by filing 482 application bearing No.13884 of 2022 and co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.06.2022 referred the matter to Mediation Centre but parties did not settle their matter and mediation get failed. 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 in trial proceedings. 4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that applicant is not co-operating in the trial proceedings as he is willfully delaying the trial proceedings. Applicant is husband of opposite party No.2 and charge sheet has been submitted as well as mediation has failed. It is not a case of false implication. The applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant may be rejected. 5. The object of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is that a person should not be unnecessarily harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy personal vendetta or grudge of complainant or any other person operating the things directly or from behind the curtains. 6. It is well settled that discretionary power conferred by the legislature on this Court cannot be put in a straitjacket formula but such discretionary power either grant or refusal of anticipatory bail has to be exercised carefully in appropriate cases with circumspection on the basis of the available material after evaluating the facts of the particular case and considering other relevant factors (nature and gravity of accusation, role attributed to accused, conduct of accused, criminal antecedents, possibility of the applicant to flee from justice, apprehension of tempering of the witnesses or threat to the complainant, impact of grant of anticipatory bail in investigation or society etc.) with meticulous precision maintaining balance between the conflicting interest, namely, sanctity of individual liberty and interest of society. 7. Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case and considering the submissions advanced, the nature and gravity of the accusation, I find no good ground for anticipatory bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case. No interference is warranted. 8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. 9. However, if the applicant surrender before the concerned court within two weeks from today and applies for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the court concerned, in accordance with law. Order Date :- 14.2.2025 Nitin Verma Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad