Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:3324 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 28 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd. Akram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sukh Deo Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Sukh Deo Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Alok Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 2. In view of the proposed order, the notice to opposite party No.2 is hereby dispensed with. 3. This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the present applicant (Mohd. Akram) apprehending his arrest in F.I.R./Case Crime No.481 of 2024, under Sections 87, 69, 127 (2), 351 (3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station- Rudauli, District-Ayodhya. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.). 5.Attention has been drawn towards the impugned First Information Report (in short F.I.R.) wherein the sole allegation / main allegation has been levelled against elder brother of the present applicant, namely, Mohd. Amir. The allegation further says that his elder brother, Mohd. Amir, has established physical relations with the prosecutrix on the pretext of false promise of marriage. The prosecutrix and his elder brother were in affairs and were got married to each other. While recording the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 180 B.N.S.S., she has stated that on 31.10.2024 she left her home and had gone to another place with the elder brother of the present applicant with whom she was willing to get married as she is major. However, in her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., she changed the story levelling allegation against the elder brother Mohd. Amir. The prosecutrix has refused to get medical examination though the medical examination was necessary. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court granted regular bail to the elder brother of the present applicant, Mohd. Amir, on 2012.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.13245 of 2024; Mohd. Amir vs. State of U.P. Investigation is going on in the matter. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. He is having permanent address, therefore, there is no flight risk. He undertakes that he shall cooperate in the investigation, therefore, till completion of investigation and filing of the police report, the liberty of the resent applicant may be protected in the light of the dictum of Apex Court rendered in the case in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC online SC 98. 7. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant. 8. Therefore, without entering into merits of the issue, considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, considering the material available on record the contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the statement of the prosecutrix and the undertaking of the present applicant that he shall co-operate in the investigation and shall never misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, I find it appropriate that liberty of the present applicant may be protected till completion of the investigation and filing of the police report in view of the dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. 9. Therefore, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant (Mohd. Akram) shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number, till completion of investigation and filing of the police report on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/ court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 27.01.2025 at 11:00 a.m. sharp to co-operate in the investigation and he shall further appear before the Investigation Officer to co-operate in the investigation, failing which, benefit of this order shall not be extended to him and the Investigating Officer/ the Court concerned would be at liberty to take any coercive steps against him strictly in accordance with law. (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 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 prior permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence during trial; (v) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail; (vi) that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the learned counsel for the State shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. 10. In view of the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant anticipatory bail application is disposed of finally. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 20.1.2025 Suresh/ Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench