Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:16266 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 228 of 2025 Applicant :- Shaib Nabi Sofi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Vikram Singh,Abdul Malik,Vivek Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for opposite party. 2. Learned counsel for applicant is granted liberty to implead the informant as opposite party No.2 and to correct the numbering of parties during course of day. Learned A.G.A. has accepted notice on behalf of newly impleaded opposite party. 2. First anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to case crime No. 100/2024 under Sections 318 (4), 336 (3), 112, 340 (2) BNS, 2023 and Sections 13(5) and 11(7) of the Uttar Pradesh Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 and Section 66D of the I.T Act, P.S. Hussainganj, District Lucknow. 3. As per contents of first information report, certain social media posts were made with regard to police recruitment to be held in 2024. Allegation levelled against the applicant is that he also created a social media account and posted a fabricated question paper pertaining to the said recruitment while seeking payment for answering questions on the same. 4. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of state is taken on record. 5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that he has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him. It is also submitted that although initially Section 338 BNS 2023 was indicated against the applicant but has subsequently been dropped. He has submitted that even otherwise the provisions of Section 11(vii) of the U.P. Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act 2004 is inapplicable in the case of applicant since as per contents of F.I.R. itself, the allegation against the applicant is not of having supplied or answered the actual question paper but only a fabricated forged one and therefore there was no question of providing any wrongful gain to any examinee. It is also submitted that since Section 11 of the Act of 2024 is inapplicable, consequently provisions of Section 13(5) of the said Act will also be inapplicable in case of petitioner particularly in view of definition of the term 'solver gang' as per section 2(i) of the Act of 2024 since there is no allegation against the applicant that he impersonated himself to be a general examinee in a public examination or that he has acquired any question paper or copy of it relating to public examination. 6. It is also submitted that the applicant is fully cooperating in investigation in which charge sheet has not yet been filed. It is also submitted that the applicant is a student of B.Sc. Medical Laboratory and Technology in Bangalore University and any arrest in terms of the F.I.R. would have and adverse effect upon his career particularly since investigation is yet ongoing. 7. Learned A.G.A. has opposed bail application with the submission that as per current investigation, the social media post has been traced to the applicant including that of his phone number and the aspect of provisions imputed against the applicant are clearly made out. It is admitted that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant. 8. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, the allegations as levelled against the applicant in terms of Sections 11 (vii), 13(5), read with section 2(i) of the Act of 2024 will require to be considered during investigation or trial, if any. It is not denied that the applicant is student pursuing his higher studies in the Bangalore University and the investigation has not yet concluded. Learned counsel for applicant has also provided an undertaking of applicant that he shall cooperate in the investigation. 7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the that the liberty of the applicant may be protected till filing of police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. 8. In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant- Shaib Nabi Sofi shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid Case Crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witnesses. (2) The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/1.O./S.H.O. concerned call (s) for investigation/interrogation. (3) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. (4) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. 9. The application stands allowed. Order Date :- 20.3.2025 prabhat Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench