High Court · 2025

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0118 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420 and 506 I.P.C. 1860, Police Station Mahmudabad, District- Sitapur. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 21.01.2025 following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0118 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420 and 506 I.P.C. 1860, Police Station Mahmudabad, District-Sitapur. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is a teacher and false allegation has been leveled against him that he has misappropriated some public fund. He next submits that the F.I.R. has been lodged in way back 2018 and charge sheet has been filed in 2020 and it has specifically been stated in para 29 of the application that neither N.B.W nor proclamation under Section 82 has been issued yet and it is not a case that the applicant has ever absconded from the investigation proceedings as well as proceedings before the trial court. He further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is a law abiding citizen and he has acute apprehension of being arrested by the police, as such, he may be granted anticipatory bail which he will not misuse. Further submitted that the identically situated co-accused namely, Vijay Kumar Alias Bablu has already been granted interim protection by this court vide order dated 07-01-2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 3 of 2025 and the applicant is seeking parity of the same. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and there is sufficient proof that he has committed cheat and fraud, as such, he is not entitled to any relief, but, he could not dispute the fact that the identically situated co-accused, named above, has already been granted interim protection by this court. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court find it to be a fit case of anticipatory bail. Till the next date of listing, the present applicant,Kaushal Kumar,shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case charge sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. List/put up this matter in Third Week of February 2025. In the meantime, learned counsel for the State shall file the counter affidavit." State counsel has failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavit that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Kaushal Kumar till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this order. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 (Manoj K.) MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0118 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420 and 506 I.P.C. 1860, Police Station Mahmudabad, District- Sitapur. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 21.01.2025 following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0118 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420 and 506 I.P.C. 1860, Police Station Mahmudabad, District-Sitapur. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is a teacher and false allegation has been leveled against him that he has misappropriated some public fund. He next submits that the F.I.R. has been lodged in way back 2018 and charge sheet has been filed in 2020 and it has specifically been stated in para 29 of the application that neither N.B.W nor proclamation under Section 82 has been issued yet and it is not a case that the applicant has ever absconded from the investigation proceedings as well as proceedings before the trial court. He further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is a law abiding citizen and he has acute apprehension of being arrested by the police, as such, he may be granted anticipatory bail which he will not misuse. Further submitted that the identically situated co-accused namely, Vijay Kumar Alias Bablu has already been granted interim protection by this court vide order dated 07-01-2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 3 of 2025 and the applicant is seeking parity of the same. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and there is sufficient proof that he has committed cheat and fraud, as such, he is not entitled to any relief, but, he could not dispute the fact that the identically situated co-accused, named above, has already been granted interim protection by this court. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court find it to be a fit case of anticipatory bail. Till the next date of listing, the present applicant,Kaushal Kumar,shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case charge sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. List/put up this matter in Third Week of February 2025. In the meantime, learned counsel for the State shall file the counter affidavit." State counsel has failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavit that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Kaushal Kumar till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this order. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 (Manoj K.) MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench