HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7520 of 2025 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Sri Raj Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA, for the State. 2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 32A of 2006, under Sections 409,419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201, 218, 120B and 34 IPC read with Section 13(2) Anti Corruption Act, Police Station Dubhar, District Ballia during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are fair price shop dealers and on the basis of false allegation of misappropriation of government fund they have been roped in the present matter alongwith as many as 79 persons including several public servants. 4. He further submits that FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2006 and charge sheet could only be filed in the year 2019 and cognizance was taken by court concerned on 24.5.2025 and this fact itself suggests that on the basis of false allegation applicants and other accused have been made accused in the present matter. 5. He further submits that during investigation applicants challenged the FIR of the present case before this Court in Criminal Misc.Writ Petition Nos. 8623 of 2017 (Madan Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. and others) and 29355 of 2018 (Hari Shankar Singh Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others) and Division Bench of this Court on 19.5.2017 and 12.10.2018, respectively, was pleased to stay the arrest of the applicants, till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. 6. He further submits that pursuant to the orders passed by Division Bench of this Court dated 19.5.2017 and 12.12.2018 applicants were not arrested during investigation and there is no allegation that they did not cooperate with the investigation. 7. He further submits that now charge sheet has been filed and there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicants. 8. He further submits that applicants are having apprehension, if they will appear before the court concerned then they will be sent to jail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raj Nath Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Madan Singh And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 9. He further submits that applicants are not having any previous criminal history. 10. He further submits that therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, applicants should be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of the trial. 11. Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. However, as per allegation applicants were the fair price shop dealer and they along with other accused misappropriated the public fund but it reflects that their arrest was stayed by Division Bench of this Court during investigation and there is no allegation that during investigation applicants did not cooperate with the investigation. 14. Further, investigation of the case has been completed and charge sheet has been filed and after submission of charge sheet custodial interrogation of the applicants are not required. 15. Further, applicants are not having any previous criminal history to their credit. 16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of the trial. 17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed. 18. In the event of arrest of the applicants- Madan Singh, Samarjit Singh, Murli Manohar Singh and Hari Shanker Singh involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of the trial case 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 them 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 temper 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; 19. 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. 20. It is made clear that the 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 15, 2025 Ankita NABAIL No. 7520 of 2025 2 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad