ANKIT KAKKARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 9260 of 2025

Ankit Kakkar
                                                                  .....Applicant(s)
                                      Versus

State of U.P. and Another
                                                                       .....Opposite
                                                                             Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Anshul Kumar                Singhal,     Vimlendu
                                Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 72
                  HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the
State and perused the record.

2. The applicant- Ankit Kakkar was granted interim anticipatory bail in
the present case by this Court vide order dated 08.12.2025. The aforesaid
order dated 08.12.2025 is quoted herein below:

     "1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on
     record.

     2. Heard Shri Anshul Kumar Singhal along with Shri Vimlendu Tripathi,
     learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Chandra Shekhar Saran, learned
     A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

     3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in
     Case Crime no.454 of 2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of
     I.P.C., Police Station Nandgram, Commissionerate, District Ghaziabad,
     with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on
     bail.

     4. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant
     is the citizen of India and he is presently staying in Canada for the
     purpose of business. It is further submitted that the applicant is not
     named in the first information report and his name has surfaced in the
                                                        NABAIL No. 9260 of 2025
                              2


incident only after he left this country for Canada in connection with
some business work in the month of November, 2023. It is further
submitted that the applicant is ready and willing to cooperate in the
investigation / trial as and when he returns in India and he also
undertakes to file his personal affidavit before this Court. It is further
submitted that some interim protection may be granted so that he can
come to India and cooperate in the investigation / trial, and he also
undertakes to deposit whatever amount he has received in his bank
account under protest. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to
co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the
investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is
granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will
co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

5. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon the judgement of Division
Bench of Kerala High Court at Ernakulam in the case of Anu Mathew Vs.
State of Kerala passed in Bail Application No.4421 of 2022, in which,
paragraphs 95, 98, 110 and 115 of the above judgement, which reads as
under:-

"95. In the present two cases as well as in the other connected cases,
which were heard, along with this case, the applicant/accused had taken
the definite stand that though were abroad at the time of filing of the
application, they would immediately come back to India and co-operate
with the investigation and the trial process, etc. In many a case, the
accused might have been abroad even at the time of registration of the
crime and that could be a clear indicator that there was no intention of
the accused to flee away from the arm of the law. Though, the accused
would have left the country after the registration of the crime, he may
come with pleas that the said action was bonafide and genuine, as he was
constrained to go abroad in view of his employment compulsions and
that, he would immediately come back to India and co-operate with the
investigati0n   and   the   trial.   Such   factual   submissions   of   the
applicant/accused should be carefully assessed and weighed by the court
and it may be examined as to whether such pleas are genuine and
bonafide or whether such pleas are made only to hoodwink the court.
                                                         NABAIL No. 9260 of 2025
                              3


Many a time, the courts could take cognizance of the social reality that
various individuals go abroad out of employment requirements and
especially, in view of the strict labour law regime in certain countries like
the Gulf countries. The person concerned may lose his means of
livelihood, if he does not meet the timeline and reporting for duty. The
courts should always have the "third eye", to discern the genuineness and
bonafides of such pleas, bearing in mind that, the serious issues of
personal of liberty are entailed in consideration of such bail pleas. So
also, the Courts should intensely apply its mind as to whether the attempt
of the accused who is abroad, is to buy time and stultify the investigation
and the trial. Needless to say, there is no question of this Court or any
court for that matter laying down any general rules of universal
application, which would more often than not fall in straitjackets, which
is highly undesirable and goes against the essence of the jurisprudential
idea of judicial discretion and duty of Judges.

98. After consideration of such parameters and criteria, the court takes a
view that anticipatory bail could be granted to such an accused, who is
abroad at the time of filing of an application, then the serious issue of
laying down conditions to regulate the grant of bail, should be seriously
considered, as envisaged in Sec.438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. Some of such
illustrative conditions to regulate the grant of bail, as envisaged in Sec.
438(2) are referred to in Clauses (i) to (iv) thereof. Condition No.(i) is
that the accused should make hi9mself available for interrogation by a
Police Officer as and when required previous permission of the Court
concerned. Condition No.(iv) is such other conditions as may be imposed
under Sec. 437(3), as if the bail granted under that Section.

110. Suffice to say, the courts may have to cautiously and prudently
assess the scenario and in such cases, it may be only in the fitness of
things and to avoid giving leverage to the accused to abuse or misuse the
grant of the bail order to stipulate a condition as per Sec.438(2) to
regulate the bail order granted as per Sec.438(1) that the accused should
come back to the country and co-operate with the Police investigati0n
within a reasonable time limit. So also, the courts could impose
conditions in the nature of Clause (iii) of Sec.438(2) that, in such a
                                                         NABAIL No. 9260 of 2025
                               4


scenario the accused shall not leave India without the prior permission of
the jurisdictional court concerned. In cases of this nature, conditions as
per clauses (i) & (iii) of Sec.438(2), would be necessary to effectuate the
very purpose of grant of bail, which is to ensure that the accused co-
operates with both the investigati0n and the trial.

115. It is also pointed out that if the Court can pass interim bail order to
an accused who is abroad and can later vacate the interim bail order and
dismiss the main bail application, if he does not comply with the
condition to come to India within a specified time limit to co-operate with
the police investigation, then the aforesaid option of passing a final order
granting bail, with the afore conditions is also a lawful option in the
exercise of discretion. In this regard, it is to be noted that such an option
will also be open to the Court, depending upon the facts and
circumstances of the case and if the Court is convinced that such
discretion in that regard could be prudently exercised, so as to avoid
misuse of the bail orders secured by accused, who is abroad. "

6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for
anticipatory bail and he does not dispute the factual aspect of the matter.

7. Applicant is not named in the first information report and his name has
surfaced in the incident only after he left this country for Canada in
connection with some business work in the month of November, 2023. It is
further submitted that the applicant is ready and willing to cooperate in
the investigation / trial as and when he returns in India and he also
undertakes to file his personal affidavit before this Court.

8. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State
of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme
Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature
and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to
flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material
against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has
also to be taken into consideration.

9. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Ankit Kakkar involved in the
                                                             NABAIL No. 9260 of 2025
                                   5


     aforesaid case crime shall be released on interim anticipatory bail till
     22.01.2026 on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- within a
     month with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
     Court concerned, with the following conditions :-

     (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would
     appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the
     Court concerned;

     (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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to
     any police officer;

     (iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse
     the liberty of bail.

     (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the
     Court concerned.

     10. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty
     to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail
     granted to the applicant.

     11. The applicant shall file personal affidavit in support of the present
     application before this Court within five weeks.

     12. List this case on 22.01.2026 as fresh. "

3. Earlier interim anticipatory bail was granted to the applicant vide order
dated 08.12.2025 and in pursuance of aforesaid order, the applicant is
regularly appearing before the learned trial court which is clear from
perusal of order sheet appended in supplementary affidavit dated
13.07.2026. The applicant is regularly appearing before the learned trial
court, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation of the
applicant.

4. In view of above, the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant
vide order dated 08.12.2025 is hereby made absolute. The applicant will
                                                                                           NABAIL No. 9260 of 2025
                                                                   6


                                    remain on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on the same terms and
                                    conditions as given in the order dated 08.12.2025 passed by this Court.

                                    5. The anticipatory bail application stands allowed.

                                    6. In default or misuse of any of the conditions mentioned in the order
                                    dated 08.12.2025, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first
                                    informant-complainant would be at liberty to file appropriate application
                                    for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant, before the
                                    concerned court.



                                                                                      (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.)
                                    September 18, 2026
                                    A.P. Pandey




Digitally signed by :-
ANAND PRAKASH PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad