Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:14274 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 629 of 2025 Applicant :- Dr. Parvez Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sharique Ahmed Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. 2. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Session in Case Crime No. 507 of 2017, under sections 354, 376, 511, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District- Mau, during the pendency of trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is neither a doctor nor was having any clinic. He has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 03.08.2016. The application for registration of the first information report was filed on 11.08.2017. The delay is fatal to the prosecution case. There are contradictions in the statement of the victim under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. Further, during the pendency of the investigation, the applicant was granted protection till submission of police report vide order dated 10.10.2017 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 21437 of 2017 (Parvez Ahmad vs. State of U.P. and 2 others). Investigation has been completed. The applicant had cooperated in the investigation. Charge-sheet has been filed. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicant has been summoned by the concerned court vide order dated 04.01.2024. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para nos. 29, 30 and 31 of the bail application. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. In case, the applicant is released on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and the fact that the F.I.R. was lodged belatedly, the fact that there are contradictions in the statement of the victim under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., the fact that during the pendency of the investigation, the applicant was granted protection till submission of police report. The applicant had cooperated in the investigation and no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 6. In the event of arrest, the applicant Dr. Parvez, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall make himself available on each date fixed in the matter 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court; (iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court. 7. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same. 8. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 31.1.2025 Sachin Mishra Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad