JUDGMENT Deepak Kumar agarwal, J. - Heard on the first application under section 438 of Cr.P.C. filed by the applicants for grant of anticipatory bail. T he applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.505/2021 registered at Police Station Hazira, District Gwalior (MP) for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 294, 506, 34 of IPC. As per the prosecution story, on 10.11.2021 at 5 P.M., complainant Sunil Maheshwari, Executive Director of Deendayal Industries Ltd., Gwalior has filed a computerized written complaint against present applicant and two others namely accused No.1 Rahul Khestrapal, accused No.2 Mahendra Singh and accused No.3/present applicant Nakul Sethi that complainant is the Executive Director of Deendayal Industries Ltd., Gwalior, manufacturer of ayurvedi medicines and is registered under Companies act, 1956. For the distribution and sale, company has appointed accused No.1 Rahul Khestrapal for office situated at Prempuram, area of 68.69. accused No.2 Mahendra Singh is deputed by accused No.1 Rahul Khestrapal for overall sale and purchase of the medicines. In between complainant and accused No.2 ayurvedic medicines were sent for distribution for sale. as per complainant, accused No.1 and 2 have a stock of medicines stored at worth Rs.39,83,344/-. They are selling with the assistance of accused No.3/present applicant in the market. It is also alleged that accused No.3, present applicant has started selling his ayurvedic medicines in the trade name 'Deendayal' which is similar to the brand of the complainant. Due to accutees of applicant No.3/ present applicant he is facing financial loss. Before lodging the F.I.R., he has served notice to the present applicant/accused and two others and demanded balance amount but they did not return. On the basis of F.I.R., offence under Sections 406, 294, 506, 34 of IPC was registered against the present applicant and two others. It is submitted by counsel for the applicant that applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case and he has not committed any offence in any manner, hence, prayed for grant of anticipatory bail. Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the application and prayed for its rejection. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and considered the arguments advanced by them and perused the record. Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the application and prayed for its rejection. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and considered the arguments advanced by them and perused the record. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, by allowing the application of the present applicant, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant be released on bail on furnishing a local surety of Rs.25,000/-and also furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. twenty Five Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/Investigating Officer. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial and shall apply regular application before the trial Court as and when required. She shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. With the aforesaid directions, the present application stands disposed of. Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions.