JUDGMENT : Shree Prakash Singh, J. 1. Case called out. 2. None is present for the complainant/opposite party no. 4 nor counter affidavit has been filed by the counsel for the complainant till date in terms of order dated 25.10.2024. 3. Rejoinder affidavit filed today by the counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 4. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 5. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case Crime No. 119 of 2024, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 of IPC, P.S. - Hazratganj District - Lucknow. 6. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 25.10.2024, following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0119 of 2024, under sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 of IPC P.S. - Hazratganj District - Lucknow. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the FIR has been lodged for a dispute which is civil in nature. He submits that due to business transactions an amount of Rs. 26,00,000/- was received by the applicant and out of which Rs. 25,00,000/- has been returned back through R.T.G.S and Rs.1,00,000/- has remained to be paid. He submits that he will pay the same within short span of time and thus, the applicant has no criminal intent to commit any offence. He also submits that there is apprehension that the applicant will be arrested by the police thus, submission is that the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the submissions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is involved in committed offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the submissions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is involved in committed offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, till the next date of listing, the present applicant-Qamruddin Jalaluddin @ Qamruddin Khan 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 chargesheet 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. Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 4, returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. If steps are taken, office shall proceed accordingly. List/put up this matter on 14.11.2024, as fresh. In the meantime, the State as well as opposite party no. 4 may file their counter " 7. 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. 8. 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. 8. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Qamruddin Jalaluddin @ Qamruddin Khan 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; (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. 9. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this order.