1. List revised.

2. Learned counsel for the informant is not present.

3. Heard Sri Gaurav Kumar Yadav, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Rajjrshi Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA on behalf of the State and perused the record.

4. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.12 of 2004 (Criminal Case No.2664 of 2012), under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station- Gulawati, DistrictBulandshahar, till conclusion of trial.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the applicant next submits that instant anticipatory bail application has been filed after submission of charge-sheet and applicant is cooperating in the court proceeding. It is management dispute. By order dated 21.08.2023, the applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail. Applicant has not misused the anticipatory bail granted to him and co-operated in the investigation proceedings. It has been submitted that in case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

6. On the other hand, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

7. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

8. Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may be adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.

9. Let the applicant- Raj Kumar, who is involved in the aforesaid crime, be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

i. The applicant shall not leave India during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

ii. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.

iii. 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;

iv. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.

v. In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law.

vi. 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) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.