High Court · 2025

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

3. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.07.2025 has granted interim protection to the applicant, the order is extracted below:- "1. Heard Shri Ashutosh Bajpai, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Arun Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. Issue notice to opposite party no.2.

3. Steps within a week.

4. Office to proceed accordingly.

5. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is apprehending his arrest in Case Crime/ FIR No.126 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 64(1) of BNS and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Police Station- Dargah Sharif, District- Bahraich.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the First Information Report (in short FIR).

7. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR, wherein the date of incident has been indicated as 26.04.2025, however, the FIR has been lodged on 10.05.2025 without explaining the aforesaid inordinate delay. Further attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.4, which is a statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 180 BNSS, wherein she has not levelled any allegation against the present applicant, rather has stated that she had gone with co-accused Rizwan to Mumbai, where she started living with him as husband and wife. In such statement she has stated that she, the present applicant (Anvar) and the Rizwan are good friends. While recording her statement under Section 183 BNSS, she could not maintain the same story, rather this statement is contradictory to the earlier statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS inasmuch as in this statement, she has stated that she had gone with co-accused Rizwan on the instigation of the present applicant, however, co-accused Rizwan was not agreed to take her to the Mumbai. In this statement she has stated that the co- accused Rizwan has not committed any misdeed with her.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that since there is an unexplained delay in lodging the FIR, there are apparent contradiction in the statement under Section 180 and 183 BNSS, therefore, liberty of the present applicant may be protected. Learned counsel has further submitted that the investigation is going on and the present applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation if his liberty is protected. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever, therefore, the aspect of liberty may be protected in the light of the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

9. Matter requires consideration.

10. Let counter affidavit be filed within a period of four weeks.

11. List this matter in the week commencing 18.08.2025 within top ten cases.

12. Till the next date of listing, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant Anvar shall be released on interim anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/ court concerned with the following conditions:- I. that the present applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 18.07.2025 at 11:00 AM to cooperate in the investigation and shall further cooperate in the investigation till completion of the investigation and filing of the police report, failing which, this interim order may be vacated on the next date. II. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; III. 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; IV. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; V. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant; VI. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness."

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has not misused the liberty granted by the court. Applicant has no criminal history. Charge-sheet in the case has been filed. Applicant undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the 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, he has cooperated in the investigation and he shall cooperate in the trial, the interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 14.07.2025 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

7. 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.

8. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. Order Date :- 19.8.2025 Saurabh Yadav/- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

3. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.07.2025 has granted interim protection to the applicant, the order is extracted below:- "1. Heard Shri Ashutosh Bajpai, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Arun Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. Issue notice to opposite party no.2.

3. Steps within a week.

4. Office to proceed accordingly.

5. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is apprehending his arrest in Case Crime/ FIR No.126 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 64(1) of BNS and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Police Station- Dargah Sharif, District- Bahraich.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the First Information Report (in short FIR).

7. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR, wherein the date of incident has been indicated as 26.04.2025, however, the FIR has been lodged on 10.05.2025 without explaining the aforesaid inordinate delay. Further attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.4, which is a statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 180 BNSS, wherein she has not levelled any allegation against the present applicant, rather has stated that she had gone with co-accused Rizwan to Mumbai, where she started living with him as husband and wife. In such statement she has stated that she, the present applicant (Anvar) and the Rizwan are good friends. While recording her statement under Section 183 BNSS, she could not maintain the same story, rather this statement is contradictory to the earlier statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS inasmuch as in this statement, she has stated that she had gone with co-accused Rizwan on the instigation of the present applicant, however, co-accused Rizwan was not agreed to take her to the Mumbai. In this statement she has stated that the co- accused Rizwan has not committed any misdeed with her.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that since there is an unexplained delay in lodging the FIR, there are apparent contradiction in the statement under Section 180 and 183 BNSS, therefore, liberty of the present applicant may be protected. Learned counsel has further submitted that the investigation is going on and the present applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation if his liberty is protected. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever, therefore, the aspect of liberty may be protected in the light of the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

9. Matter requires consideration.

10. Let counter affidavit be filed within a period of four weeks.

11. List this matter in the week commencing 18.08.2025 within top ten cases.

12. Till the next date of listing, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant Anvar shall be released on interim anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/ court concerned with the following conditions:- I. that the present applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 18.07.2025 at 11:00 AM to cooperate in the investigation and shall further cooperate in the investigation till completion of the investigation and filing of the police report, failing which, this interim order may be vacated on the next date. II. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; III. 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; IV. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; V. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant; VI. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness."

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has not misused the liberty granted by the court. Applicant has no criminal history. Charge-sheet in the case has been filed. Applicant undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the 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, he has cooperated in the investigation and he shall cooperate in the trial, the interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 14.07.2025 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

7. 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.

8. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. Order Date :- 19.8.2025 Saurabh Yadav/- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench