JUDGMENT : KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Shri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned Advocate appearing for the complainant who has filed vakalatnama which is taken on record. 2. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 399/2022, under Section 306 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda. 3. It is alleged in the prosecution case that the sister of the informant was posted as Assistant Manager in SBI at main Branch, Gonda. On 22.06.2022 at about 8:55 AM when he reached to the house of his sister to take Aadhar Card, he found her dead in her room and also found a suicide note. It is also alleged in the suicide note that Bank Manager, Bank Management and higher officials of the bank are responsible for the death of his sister. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the daughter of Saraswati Devi who was wife of Rakesh Chaurasiya. Saraswati had an FD and the deceased has encashed the FD into the account of her sister Priyanka Tiwari. This fact came in the investigation and due to this, the deceased might have committed suicide,however, ingredients of Section 107 read with Section 306 I.P.C. are missing from the material collected by the investigating officer. It is further submitted that the co-accused Rakesh Chaurasia @ Rakesh Kumar has been granted interim protection by this Court vide order dated 05.05.2023 passed in CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. 1050/2023. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that role of the present applicant is similar to that of the co-accused Rakesh Chaurasia. 5. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the anticipatory bail application. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that role of the present applicant is similar to that of the co-accused Rakesh Chaurasia. 5. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the anticipatory bail application. 6. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history; co accused Rakesh Chaurasia has been granted interim protection and considering the judgment of the Apex Court Netai Dutta vs. State of West Bengal, (2005) 2 SCC 659 and M. Arujnan vs. State, AIR 2019 SC 43 , it would be expedient in the interest of justice that the liberty of the applicant may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC Online SC 98. 7. It would be expedient in the interest of justice that the liberty of the applicant may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC Online SC 98. 8. In view of the above, since, charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court, if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question. The accused applicant shall be released on bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions: (i) 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 tamper with the evidence. (ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court. (iii) The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iv) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted. (v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. 9. Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed. 10. (iv) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted. (v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. 9. Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed. 10. It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. 11. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed.