Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:13993 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37981 of 2024 Applicant :- Rohan Opposite Party :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Kumari Meena,Ripu Soodan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Ripu Soodan Yadav, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State. 2. Perused the recorded. 3. Applicant-Rohan has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following prayer:- "It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be graciously be pleased to quash the bailable warrant dated 18.07.2024 passed by Session Judge and directed to Trial Court to consider the earlier surety in offence added section 376 Jha I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act which has already deposited on 24-06-2021 by the applicant in offence under section 354 IPC and 9/10 POCSO Act in S.T. No. 305 of 2023 (State of U.P. Vs. Rohan) arising out of Case Crime no. 161 of 2021 added section 376 Jha and 3/4 POCSO Act P.S. Handia District -Prayagraj, pending in the Additional Session Judge/Special POCSO Act Prayagraj. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be graciously be pleased to Stay the proceeding of 18.07.2024 passed by Session Judge and direct to Trial Court to consider the earlier surety in offence added section 376 Jha I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act which has already deposited on 24-06-2021 by the applicant in offence under section 354 IPC and 9/10 POCSO Act in S.T. No. 305 of 2023 (State of U.P. Vs. Rohan) arising out of Case Crime no. 161 of 2021 added section 376 Jha and 3/4 POCSO Act P.S. Handia District -Prayagraj pending in the Additional Session Judge/ Special POCSO Act Prayagraj. And or pass further Order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper as the circumstances of the case." 4. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. has raised a preliminary objection by submitting that since applicant has yet not been enlarged on bail under the added Sections by Court below, therefore, the acceptance of previously submitted bail bonds under the added Sections does not arise. As such, the present application is liable to be dismissed. 5. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application are clearly borne out from the record and further the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record. As such, no good ground exists to entertain the present application. 7. As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed. 8. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 24.1.2025 Vinay Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad