HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8942 of 2024 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Pursuant to the earlier order of this Court dated 01.09.2025, Sri Radhe Mohan Srivastava, Special Secretary & Additional L.R. (Legal Cell), Prayagraj is present before this Court. He has produced the letter dated 24.09.2025 sent by Special Secretary & Additional Legal Adviser, Government U.P. along with the letter dated 24.09.2025 addressed to Director General of POlice, Government of U.P. as well as Director General Prosecution Government of U.P. and Additional Director General of Police, (Criminal) Government of U.P. and after perusing the same, the same is kept on record, which is marked as "Y". 2. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant today in the Court, is taken on record. 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.K.Shukla, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Patanjali Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 4. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 250 of 2022, under Sections 406, 504, 506, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Rasulpur, District Firozabad, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 5. Vide order dated 18.09.2024, co-ordinate Bench of this Court had interim protection to the applicant. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anurag Vajpeyi, Praveen Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Manoj Kumar Srivastava, Rajesh Kumar Mukesh Jain .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the the instant proceedings is nothing but a counter blast to the proceedings initiated by the applicant and his wife for their rightful claims in the property of late Angoori Devi. Learned counsel further argued that the applicant is innocent and he has apprehension that he may be arrested in the above- mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. It has further been submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedents and that no coercive process has been issued against the applicant so far. Learned counsel also argued that the applicant undertakes to co-operate 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 co- operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 7. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and argued that credible evidence has been collected during the investigation, which has culminated in submission of charge sheet. He further argued that after grant of interim order, the accused-applicant is not attending the trial and in this regard, he has produced the order sheets of the case to demonstrate that the applicant is not appearing before the trial Court., copy of which has been produced before this Court and is taken on record. 8. Perusal of the record shows that specific allegations have been levelled against the applicant in commission of offence. The investigating officer, during the course of investigation found the complicity of the applicant in commission of offence which are supported by oral as well as documentary evidence and after collecting credible evidence against the applicant has submitted charge sheet. Furthermore, perusal of the order sheets of the case, also shows that the applicant is not appearing before the trial Court. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, has held 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. 9. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding ABAIL No. 8942 of 2024 2 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. 10. Interim order, if any stands vacated. 11. The anticipatory bail application is rejected. 12. Office is directed to communicate the order passed by this Court to the concerned Court below. September 25, 2025 S.Ali ABAIL No. 8942 of 2024 3 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad