HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 422 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Nishad, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jayant Singh Tomar, learned AGA-I for the State. 2. On 07.05.2025, after hearing learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State, this court had passed the following order: "Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party No.1. Issue notice to opposite party No.2 First anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to case crime No. 105 of 2024 under Section 75(1)(i), 352, 351(2) of BNS-2023 & 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S. Maharuaa, District Ambedkar Nagar. As per contents of F.I.R. of allegation levelled against the applicant is of attempting to make physical relations with the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manoj Kumar Nishad, Pradeep Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shivam Nishad .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) informant. It is submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him which would be evident from the fact that there is no specific allegation levelled against the applicant which would be relatable to the sections imputed against him under the POCSO Act. Learned counsel has also drawn attention to statement of informant recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS to submit that there is contradiction in the said statements and even otherwise no allegations relatable to Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act are made out. The applicant is a student and his career would be spoiled in case he is incarcerated. It is also submitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history Learned A.G.A. has opposed bail application but does not dispute the said facts. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material on record, prima facie subject to evidence led in trial, it appears that the aspect of allegations levelled against the applicant relatable to Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act would be subject matter of evidence during course of trial. The statement of informant recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS may have certain contradictions with regard to allegations levelled in the F.I.R. The applicant is a student without any previous criminal history. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court finds it to be a fit case of interim anticipatory bail. Let the accused-applicant Shivam Nishad as an interim measure be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of Supreme Court in the case of NABAIL No. 422 of 2025 2 Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court. In the event of arrest, the accused-applicant shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:- (i) That the accused-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. (ii) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. List this case on 22nd May, 2025 as fresh along with service report. Objections may be filed in the meantime." 3. The office has reported that the notice issued to the opposite party no. 2 has been served but the opposite party no. 2 has not put in appearance for opposing the anticipatory bail application. 4. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of material collected during investigation and a copy of the charge-sheet dated 26.07.2024. 5. The petitioner has filed a rejoinder affidavit. 6. The learned A.G.A. did not point out any violation of the NABAIL No. 422 of 2025 3 conditions of interim anticipatory bail by the applicant. Nothing has come to light which may persuade this court to take a view, other than the view taken at the time of granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. In view of above, the interim order dated 07.05.2025 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed in terms of the order dated 07.05.2025. September 19, 2025 Pradeep/- NABAIL No. 422 of 2025 4 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench