2025:UHC:2353 1 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA 1ST APRIL, 2025 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1162 of 2024 Joheb …Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand and Another …Respondents Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Imran Ali Khan, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Nos.1 & 2 Additional Advocate General. Counsel for the Informant : Mr. Faizan Ali, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate. Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J. The present Application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant Joheb seeking anticipatory bail under Sections 376, 384 and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in Case Crime No.268 of 2024, registered at Police Station Ramnagar, District Nainital. 2. As per the FIR, the applicant and the victim came close to each other through some social media platform. The applicant established physical relations with the victim and subsequently, declined to marry. He also started blackmailing her. 2025:UHC:2353 2 3. Heard Mr. Imran Ali Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent nos.1 & 2 and Mr. Faizan Ali, learned counsel for the informant. 4. Mr. Imran Ali Khan, Advocate, contended that the alleged victim is a major lady. Applicant and the alleged victim both were in romantic relationship. They are still in relationship. The father of the victim has lodged the FIR. 5. Counter affidavit has not been filed by the informant. 6. Mr. Faizan Ali, Advocate, has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Additional Advocate General, has also opposed the anticipatory bail application. 7. The victim is a major lady. She consented to the act of sexual relation on a promise of marriage. The court can only be assured on evidence in the trial that from the very inception the applicant never really intended to marry her. 8. Mr. Imran Ali Khan, Advocate, further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District Bijnor (U.P.), therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is 2025:UHC:2353 3 no chance of tampering with the evidence, and, the applicant was granted interim bail on 26.11.2024 by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. The conditions of the interim bail have not been violated by him 9. Personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is very precious fundamental right and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. 10. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed and the order dated 26.11.2024, granting interim bail to the applicant, is made absolute. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant, namely Joheb, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions:- (i) Applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment; (ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case. (iii) Applicant shall not leave the country 2025:UHC:2353 4 without the previous permission of the trial court. 11. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail. ___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J. Dt: 01.04.2025 Shiv/