Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:33954 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 575 of 2025 Applicant :- Anant Kumar Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lok Bhawan Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dilip Mani Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Alok Kr. Misra Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Dilip Mani, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Rajeev Kumar Verma, the learned Additional Government Advocate-I appearing on behalf of the State and Sri Alok Kumar Mishra, Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of the informant and filed his vakalatnama, which is taken on record. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.115 of 2025, under Sections 64(1), 123, 316(2), 318(4), 351(2), 352 B.N.S., registered at Police Station Ghazipur (North Commissionerate), District Lucknow. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 06.04.2025 against three persons including the applicant stating that the co-accused Suchita Chaturvedi, who is a former Member of State Child Protection Commission had introduced the informant to the applicant at her residence. The applicant proposed to get her employed in public employment and the informant paid Rs.5,00,000/- in cash and Rs.1,75,000/- through online mode for this purpose. On 23.01.2025 the applicant called her for refunding the money, he offered her water after having which the informant fell unconscious and the applicant raped her in his car. The F.I.R. further alleges that the applicant prepared obscene video. 4. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS she reiterated the F.I.R. version and she added some further allegations. 5. The medico legal examination report of the victim did not reveal anything significant. 6. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS she stated that the applicant had offered to marry her. 7. In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail- application it has been contended that the applicant is innocent, he has no criminal history and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. 8. The learned A.G.A.-I appearing on behalf of the State as well as the learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. The learned A.G.A.-I has stated that the victim has fully supported the F.I.R. allegations in her statements under Section 180 & 183 BNSS and the investigation of the case is continuing. 9. The learned counsel for the informant has submitted that even after lodging of F.I.R. the applicant has threatened the informant. 10. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that as per the narration made in the F.I.R. it was the complainant herself who first tried to secure public employment by illegal means by payment of money and after having failed in this endeavour she lodged the F.I.R. alleging commission of rape, which allegation is not supported by the findings of the medico legal examination report; that in the statement under Section 183 BNSS the informant alleged sexual exploitation under allurement of marriage, which is contradictory to her earlier version coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal history and without making any observations which may affect the outcome of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. 11. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant-Anant Kumar Pandey before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of S.H.O./Court concerned on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court: (i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (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 him 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 the previous permission of the court' (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. . (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 30.5.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench