Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48887 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 381 of 2023 Applicant :- Ameer @ Guddu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Misra,Shashin Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant apprehending his arrest in case crime/F.I.R No. 1010/2022, under Section 376/506 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District Unnao. Case called out. None appears on behalf of the applicant. Learned AGA is present. The coordinate Bench of this Court while granting interim protection to the applicant vide order dated 16.02.2023 has passed the following order:- "Heard learned counsel the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime/F.I.R No. 1010/2022, under Section 376/506 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District Unnao. In the prosecution case it is alleged by the informant that on 13.022022 when she went on her field then her devar Guddu caught hold her from behind and raped her. The incident is of 8 AM. He further threatened the prosecutrix that if she tells anyone about this, her children will be killed. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the offence is alleged to have taken place on 13.02.2022 and F.I.R. has been lodged after a delay of 10 months on 16.02.2022. The medical of the prosecutrix has been conducted on 18.12.2022. It has been further submitted a civil suit has already been filed by the sons of the informant on 29.07.2021 regarding the disputed land which is admitted in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C.The statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. are contradictory as in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. she has admitted the fact that there is a dispute regarding the land in the village whereas in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has denied any such dispute. The statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is falsified by the fact that the civil suit has already been filed by the sons of the prosecutrix on 29.07.2021 against the applicant which is pending before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Unnao and registered as 481 of 2022. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has been falsely implicated due to the fact that father of the applicant has given land in the village to the applicant and nothing has been given to the brother of the applicant who is no more. Issue notice to respondent No. 2. Learned Addl. Government Advocate prays for and is allowed 15 days' time to file counter affidavit. List on 24.03.2023. Considering the above aspect of the matter, perusal of the record as well as the fact that the applicant is brother-in-law of the prosecutrix; civil suit is pending between the parties regarding the disputed land and the delay of ten months in lodging the F.I.R., possibility of false implications cannot be ruled out and hence, considering the judgment of Apex Court passed in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned. The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. " Learned A.G.A. has informed the Court that a charge sheet has been filed. However, he has failed to show that the applicant has misused the liberty earlier granted by this Court. Considering the fact that the applicant has cooperated during the investigation and has further undertaken to cooperate in the trial, the interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 16.02.2023 is made absolute, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC OnLine SC 98. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 R.C. Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench