He also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Agrawal & v. State

1. Vakalatnama filed by Mr. Amarendra Kumar, Advocate on behalf of the complainant is taken on record.

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

3. The present application has been filed for seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 47 of 2025 under sections 74, 333, 351(3), 352 and 64 B.N.S, Police Station Kotwali Nanpara, District Bahraich.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case as the applicant was beaten by the informant of the present case and other associates. On 31.01.2025, the applicant received injuries on his head, thereafter, on the written complaint of the father of the applicant, the F.I.R bearing Case Crime No. 46 of 2025, under Sections 110, 127 (2), 115(2), 351(3) and 352 B.N.S was lodged at 20:30 hours. The applicant received injuries on his head and he was hospitalized and was under treatment since 31.01.2025 to 07.02.2025 in the Medical College, Bahraich. Thereafter, in retaliation, and only with the intention to make pressure upon the applicants, the F.I.R in question has been lodged on 01.01.2025 alleging that the applicant entered into the house of the complainant on 31.01.2025 at about 2:30 A.M with the intention to outrage the modesty of his daughter and when she raised alarm, he and his family members reached there and thereafter, the applicant started abusing and he assaulted the family members and gave them life threat and thereafter he ran away.

5. During the course of investigation, the statement of the alleged victim was recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S in which she made an allegation of molestation and thereafter, her statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S was recorded in which she developed a case of rape, but she denied her medical examination. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant is co- operating in the trial and he never misused the liberty of bail given by the learned court below. He also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Agrawal & Ors. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors. reported in MANU/SC/01002020 and Siddharth Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 615 and has submitted that the applicant is ready to cooperate in the proceeding and no custodial interrogation is necessary, therefore, he may be granted anticipatory bail.

6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of applicant but he does not dispute the fact that the prior to the lodging of the F.I.R in question, an F.I.R was already lodged by the father of the applicant against the complainant and other associates.

7. Considering the argument of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the FIR as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that neither in the F.I.R nor in the statement of the victim under Section 180 B.N.S.S the allegation of rape is found, but thereafter, in her statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S, story of rape has been developed and the victim has also denied medico- legal examination, therefore, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail.

8. In view of the above, the application is disposed of.

9. In case, the applicant, namely, Anoop Kumar Jaiswal is taken into custody, she shall be released by the Station House OfÏcer of the police station concerned, on her furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of each of like amount with the following condition:- (i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when 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. (iv) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229- A IPC/269 B.N.S. (v) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure him presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C/84 B.N.S.S., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/209 B.N.S. (vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C/351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 20.6.2025 DiVYa DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Vakalatnama filed by Mr. Amarendra Kumar, Advocate on behalf of the complainant is taken on record.

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

3. The present application has been filed for seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 47 of 2025 under sections 74, 333, 351(3), 352 and 64 B.N.S, Police Station Kotwali Nanpara, District Bahraich.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case as the applicant was beaten by the informant of the present case and other associates. On 31.01.2025, the applicant received injuries on his head, thereafter, on the written complaint of the father of the applicant, the F.I.R bearing Case Crime No. 46 of 2025, under Sections 110, 127 (2), 115(2), 351(3) and 352 B.N.S was lodged at 20:30 hours. The applicant received injuries on his head and he was hospitalized and was under treatment since 31.01.2025 to 07.02.2025 in the Medical College, Bahraich. Thereafter, in retaliation, and only with the intention to make pressure upon the applicants, the F.I.R in question has been lodged on 01.01.2025 alleging that the applicant entered into the house of the complainant on 31.01.2025 at about 2:30 A.M with the intention to outrage the modesty of his daughter and when she raised alarm, he and his family members reached there and thereafter, the applicant started abusing and he assaulted the family members and gave them life threat and thereafter he ran away.

5. During the course of investigation, the statement of the alleged victim was recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S in which she made an allegation of molestation and thereafter, her statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S was recorded in which she developed a case of rape, but she denied her medical examination. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant is co- operating in the trial and he never misused the liberty of bail given by the learned court below. He also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Agrawal & Ors. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors. reported in MANU/SC/01002020 and Siddharth Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 615 and has submitted that the applicant is ready to cooperate in the proceeding and no custodial interrogation is necessary, therefore, he may be granted anticipatory bail.

6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of applicant but he does not dispute the fact that the prior to the lodging of the F.I.R in question, an F.I.R was already lodged by the father of the applicant against the complainant and other associates.

7. Considering the argument of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the FIR as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that neither in the F.I.R nor in the statement of the victim under Section 180 B.N.S.S the allegation of rape is found, but thereafter, in her statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S, story of rape has been developed and the victim has also denied medico- legal examination, therefore, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail.

8. In view of the above, the application is disposed of.

9. In case, the applicant, namely, Anoop Kumar Jaiswal is taken into custody, she shall be released by the Station House OfÏcer of the police station concerned, on her furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of each of like amount with the following condition:- (i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when 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. (iv) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229- A IPC/269 B.N.S. (v) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure him presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C/84 B.N.S.S., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/209 B.N.S. (vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C/351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 20.6.2025 DiVYa DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench