HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9260 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The applicant- Ankit Kakkar was granted interim anticipatory bail in the present case by this Court vide order dated 08.12.2025. The aforesaid order dated 08.12.2025 is quoted herein below: "1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Anshul Kumar Singhal along with Shri Vimlendu Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Chandra Shekhar Saran, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no.454 of 2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of I.P.C., Police Station Nandgram, Commissionerate, District Ghaziabad, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is the citizen of India and he is presently staying in Canada for the purpose of business. It is further submitted that the applicant is not named in the first information report and his name has surfaced in the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anshul Kumar Singhal, Vimlendu Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ankit Kakkar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) incident only after he left this country for Canada in connection with some business work in the month of November, 2023. It is further submitted that the applicant is ready and willing to cooperate in the investigation / trial as and when he returns in India and he also undertakes to file his personal affidavit before this Court. It is further submitted that some interim protection may be granted so that he can come to India and cooperate in the investigation / trial, and he also undertakes to deposit whatever amount he has received in his bank account under protest. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, 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. 5. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon the judgement of Division Bench of Kerala High Court at Ernakulam in the case of Anu Mathew Vs. State of Kerala passed in Bail Application No.4421 of 2022, in which, paragraphs 95, 98, 110 and 115 of the above judgement, which reads as under:- "95. In the present two cases as well as in the other connected cases, which were heard, along with this case, the applicant/accused had taken the definite stand that though were abroad at the time of filing of the application, they would immediately come back to India and co-operate with the investigation and the trial process, etc. In many a case, the accused might have been abroad even at the time of registration of the crime and that could be a clear indicator that there was no intention of the accused to flee away from the arm of the law. Though, the accused would have left the country after the registration of the crime, he may come with pleas that the said action was bonafide and genuine, as he was constrained to go abroad in view of his employment compulsions and that, he would immediately come back to India and co-operate with the investigati0n and the trial. Such factual submissions of the applicant/accused should be carefully assessed and weighed by the court and it may be examined as to whether such pleas are genuine and bonafide or whether such pleas are made only to hoodwink the court. NABAIL No. 9260 of 2025 2 Many a time, the courts could take cognizance of the social reality that various individuals go abroad out of employment requirements and especially, in view of the strict labour law regime in certain countries like the Gulf countries. The person concerned may lose his means of livelihood, if he does not meet the timeline and reporting for duty. The courts should always have the "third eye", to discern the genuineness and bonafides of such pleas, bearing in mind that, the serious issues of personal of liberty are entailed in consideration of such bail pleas. So also, the Courts should intensely apply its mind as to whether the attempt of the accused who is abroad, is to buy time and stultify the investigation and the trial. Needless to say, there is no question of this Court or any court for that matter laying down any general rules of universal application, which would more often than not fall in straitjackets, which is highly undesirable and goes against the essence of the jurisprudential idea of judicial discretion and duty of Judges. 98. After consideration of such parameters and criteria, the court takes a view that anticipatory bail could be granted to such an accused, who is abroad at the time of filing of an application, then the serious issue of laying down conditions to regulate the grant of bail, should be seriously considered, as envisaged in Sec.438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. Some of such illustrative conditions to regulate the grant of bail, as envisaged in Sec. 438(2) are referred to in Clauses (i) to (iv) thereof. Condition No.(i) is that the accused should make hi9mself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required previous permission of the Court concerned. Condition No.(iv) is such other conditions as may be imposed under Sec. 437(3), as if the bail granted under that Section. 110. Suffice to say, the courts may have to cautiously and prudently assess the scenario and in such cases, it may be only in the fitness of things and to avoid giving leverage to the accused to abuse or misuse the grant of the bail order to stipulate a condition as per Sec.438(2) to regulate the bail order granted as per Sec.438(1) that the accused should come back to the country and co-operate with the Police investigati0n within a reasonable time limit. So also, the courts could impose conditions in the nature of Clause (iii) of Sec.438(2) that, in such a NABAIL No. 9260 of 2025 3 scenario the accused shall not leave India without the prior permission of the jurisdictional court concerned. In cases of this nature, conditions as per clauses (i) & (iii) of Sec.438(2), would be necessary to effectuate the very purpose of grant of bail, which is to ensure that the accused co- operates with both the investigati0n and the trial. 115. It is also pointed out that if the Court can pass interim bail order to an accused who is abroad and can later vacate the interim bail order and dismiss the main bail application, if he does not comply with the condition to come to India within a specified time limit to co-operate with the police investigation, then the aforesaid option of passing a final order granting bail, with the afore conditions is also a lawful option in the exercise of discretion. In this regard, it is to be noted that such an option will also be open to the Court, depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case and if the Court is convinced that such discretion in that regard could be prudently exercised, so as to avoid misuse of the bail orders secured by accused, who is abroad. " 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and he does not dispute the factual aspect of the matter. 7. Applicant is not named in the first information report and his name has surfaced in the incident only after he left this country for Canada in connection with some business work in the month of November, 2023. It is further submitted that the applicant is ready and willing to cooperate in the investigation / trial as and when he returns in India and he also undertakes to file his personal affidavit before this Court. 8. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court 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 event of arrest of the applicant- Ankit Kakkar involved in the NABAIL No. 9260 of 2025 4 aforesaid case crime shall be released on interim anticipatory bail till 22.01.2026 on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- within a month with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (ii) 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 10. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. 11. The applicant shall file personal affidavit in support of the present application before this Court within five weeks. 12. List this case on 22.01.2026 as fresh. " 3. Earlier interim anticipatory bail was granted to the applicant vide order dated 08.12.2025 and in pursuance of aforesaid order, the applicant is regularly appearing before the learned trial court which is clear from perusal of order sheet appended in supplementary affidavit dated 13.07.2026. The applicant is regularly appearing before the learned trial court, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation of the applicant. 4. In view of above, the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant vide order dated 08.12.2025 is hereby made absolute. The applicant will NABAIL No. 9260 of 2025 5 remain on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on the same terms and conditions as given in the order dated 08.12.2025 passed by this Court. 5. The anticipatory bail application stands allowed. 6. In default or misuse of any of the conditions mentioned in the order dated 08.12.2025, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant would be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant, before the concerned court. September 18, 2026 A.P. Pandey NABAIL No. 9260 of 2025 6 (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND PRAKASH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ANAND PRAKASH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ANAND PRAKASH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ANAND PRAKASH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad