Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:12101 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 58 of 2025 Applicant :- Sarvesh (In Adhar Card Sarvesh Kumar ) Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Aman Kumar Shrivastav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Vide order dated 20.1.2025, the notice was issued to the opposite party no. 2 and as per office report, the same has been served upon the opposite party no. 2, but no one has put in appearance. Under the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is proceeding in this matter. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present application under Section 438 Cr.PC./482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 186 of 2020, under Sections 354A, I.P.C. and Section 7/8 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Dhaurahra, District Kheri. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 20.1.2025, following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- “Learned counsel for the State submits that notice has been served upon the alleged victim. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.186 of 2020, under Sections 354A, I.P.c. and Section 7/8 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Dhaurahra, District Kheri. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that only allegation in the F.I.R. is that the applicant caught the hand of the alleged victim and the applicant is named in the F.I.R. but the victim did not name the applicant. He also added that there is material contradiction in the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and there is no independent public witness and the charge sheet has been filed, as such, there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence and he will appear before the trial court as and when required. He further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is a law abiding citizen and he has acute apprehension of being arrested by the police, as such, he may be granted anticipatory bail which he will not misuse. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and there is sufficient proof that he has committed the offence as such, he is not entitled to any relief. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court find it to be a fit case of interim anticipatory bail. Till the next date of listing, the present applicant Sarvesh (in adhar card Sarvesh Kumar) shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) 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; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case charge sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. Issue notice to the opposite party no.2 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within one week. List/put up this matter in week commencing 24.2.2024. In the meantime, the opposite parties shall file their counter affidavits.” State counsel has failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavit that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Sarvesh (In Adhar Card Sarvesh Kumar) till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) 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; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this order. Order Date :- 27.2.2025 Shravan Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench