High Court · 2025

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail in Case Crime (FIR) No. 103 of 2019, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 506 IPC, Police Station Itiyathok, District Gonda. The notice has been issued to the complainant/opposite party no. 2 and as per office report, the same has been served personally but no one is present for the complainant/opposite party no. 2. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 11.11.2024, following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "1. Heard Shri Pankaj Verma, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Hari Shanker Bajpai, learned A.G.A. for the State/opposite party No.1.

2. Issue notice to opposite party No.2 returnable at an early date. Steps to be taken within a week. Office to proceed accordingly.

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is apprehending his arrest in Case Crime No.0103/2023, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 506 I.P.C., at Police Station - Itiyathok, District - Gonda.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. Present applicant is a retired Branch Manager of Sarva U.P. Gramin Bank, retired in the year 2020. Since the offence under which the F.I.R. was lodged are having punishment up to 07 years therefore the applicant was given notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. Pursuant thereto, the present applicant cooperated in the investigation properly and did not flout the process of law. Thereafter, chargesheet has been filed wherein the learned trial court issued summons. After receiving summons, the applicant filed his bond with the undertaking that he shall remain present in trial court, but thereafter he filed anticipatory bail application before the learned Session Judge, which was rejected on

21.10.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that since the present applicant is a retired branch manager, is having his permanent address, there is no flight risk and has not misused the process of law during investigation and that applicant undertakes that if he is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the anticipatory bail, he shall cooperate with the trial proceedings, therefore, applicant may be granted anticipatory bail in view of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC online SC 98.

6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but he has not disputed the aforesaid submissions.

7. Let counter affidavit be filed within a period of four weeks.

8. List this case in week commencing 16th December, 2024.

9. Having considered the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record, without entering into the merits of the issue, considering the fact that present applicant is a retired Branch Manager and has cooperated in the investigation, charge sheet has been filed and he has given an undertaking that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, if granted, and also considering the fact that there is no flight risk, as the applicant is having permanent address, I find it appropriate that liberty of the present applicant may be protected in view of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC online SC 98.

10. Till the next date of listing, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant shall be released on interim anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/court concerned with the following conditions :- (i). the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required; (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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; and (iii). the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court." From perusal of the order dated 11.11.2024, it transpires that State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly 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 proceeding 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, Praveen Kumar Verma 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 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 interim protection. Order Date :- 22.1.2025 kkv/ KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail in Case Crime (FIR) No. 103 of 2019, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 506 IPC, Police Station Itiyathok, District Gonda. The notice has been issued to the complainant/opposite party no. 2 and as per office report, the same has been served personally but no one is present for the complainant/opposite party no. 2. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 11.11.2024, following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "1. Heard Shri Pankaj Verma, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Hari Shanker Bajpai, learned A.G.A. for the State/opposite party No.1.

2. Issue notice to opposite party No.2 returnable at an early date. Steps to be taken within a week. Office to proceed accordingly.

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is apprehending his arrest in Case Crime No.0103/2023, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 506 I.P.C., at Police Station - Itiyathok, District - Gonda.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. Present applicant is a retired Branch Manager of Sarva U.P. Gramin Bank, retired in the year 2020. Since the offence under which the F.I.R. was lodged are having punishment up to 07 years therefore the applicant was given notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. Pursuant thereto, the present applicant cooperated in the investigation properly and did not flout the process of law. Thereafter, chargesheet has been filed wherein the learned trial court issued summons. After receiving summons, the applicant filed his bond with the undertaking that he shall remain present in trial court, but thereafter he filed anticipatory bail application before the learned Session Judge, which was rejected on

21.10.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that since the present applicant is a retired branch manager, is having his permanent address, there is no flight risk and has not misused the process of law during investigation and that applicant undertakes that if he is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the anticipatory bail, he shall cooperate with the trial proceedings, therefore, applicant may be granted anticipatory bail in view of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC online SC 98.

6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but he has not disputed the aforesaid submissions.

7. Let counter affidavit be filed within a period of four weeks.

8. List this case in week commencing 16th December, 2024.

9. Having considered the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record, without entering into the merits of the issue, considering the fact that present applicant is a retired Branch Manager and has cooperated in the investigation, charge sheet has been filed and he has given an undertaking that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, if granted, and also considering the fact that there is no flight risk, as the applicant is having permanent address, I find it appropriate that liberty of the present applicant may be protected in view of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC online SC 98.

10. Till the next date of listing, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant shall be released on interim anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/court concerned with the following conditions :- (i). the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required; (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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; and (iii). the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court." From perusal of the order dated 11.11.2024, it transpires that State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly 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 proceeding 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, Praveen Kumar Verma 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 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 interim protection. Order Date :- 22.1.2025 kkv/ KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench