HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4073 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J. 1. Heard Sri Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants and Learned AGA for the State. 2. The present anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of BNSS has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.11 of 2018, under Sections 420, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, P.S.- Delhi Gate, District- Meerut, during pendency of the trial. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the accused applicants have been falsely implicated in the FIR dated 17.1.2018 with the allegation that the accused applicants got manufactured false income certificate in connivance with the revenue officials to claim Kanya Vidhya Dhan Scheme of the Government. After submission of the charge sheet in the year 2024, the summons have been issued. During investigation, the accused applicants have not been arrested. Their anticipatory bail application was rejected by the Session Court. It is further contended that the accused applicants have no criminal history. They are senior citizens. Other co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. The accused applicants are apprehending arrest and want to appear before the trial court to face trial. Hence, they seek anticipatory bail. 4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Kumar, Vinod Kumar Tirpathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rakesh Kumar And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) applicants. 5. The scope of ambit of anticipatory bail is encapsulated in three insightful judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court right from Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab reported in (1980) 2 SCC 565, Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694 and Sushila Aggarwal and others Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, wherein it is consistently held by Hon’ble Apex Court that while granting anticipatory bail, the Court should considering the application of the applicant to evaluate the threat or apprehension of arrest vis-a-vis the nature and gravity of accusation, criminal antecedent of the accused, false or exaggerated implication, need of custodial interrogation, willingness of the accused to cooperate in investigation and trial and the conduct of the accused and flight risk. 6. Considering that during investigation, the accused applicant have not been arrested, the gravity of accusation and apprehension of arrest in the case vis-a-vis low flight risk and assurance of the accused in cooperating with the investigation and trial, is of considered view to grant anticipatory bail. 7. The applicants- Rakesh Kumar and Jaiprakash involved in the aforesaid case crime shall appear before the trial court or the Investigating Officer, as the case may be within 30 days from the date of this order and shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with following conditions :- (i) The applicant 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) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) NABAIL No. 4073 of 2026 2 recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. May 6, 2026 Krishna* NABAIL No. 4073 of 2026 3 (Avnish Saxena,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad