Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:34418 Court No. - 4 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 628 of 2025 Applicant :- Siraj Ahmad And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rama Kant Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J. Heard Shri Rama Kant Dixit, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. The instant application has been preferred by the applicants Siraj Ahmad, Ansar, Iliyas, Raju Ahmad, Saleem and Anees, under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., seeking anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.432/2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 74 BNS and 9(g)/10 POCSO Act and 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act, relating to police station Hardi, District Bahraich. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in this case due to enmity. It has been pointed out that as per the averments made in the First Information Report, it was alleged by the complainant that about 6 months ago, the minor niece of the complainant was enticed away by the accused and she was forced to change her religion. In respect of the said incident, an First Information Report was lodged bearing Case Crime No. 107 of 2024 under Sections 363, 366, 374 (D) of the POCSO Act and SC/SC Act. The accused of the said case after having been released on bail, once again on 05.09.2024 came to the house of the complainant in the evening between 07:00 PM to 08:00 PM, the present applicants were present along with weapons comprising sticks, sword and knife, It is alleged that the applicants not only destroyed the household items but mixed sand with the stored grains. They also hit the minor child and forcibly tored her clothes and inappropriately touched and fondled her. The complainant and the minor child were threatened that in case she deposed before the Court in respect of Case Crime No. 107 of 2024, then the complainant would suffer grave consequences. The Investigating Officer has recorded the statement of the complainant under Section 180 BNSS, however, she reiterated her version of the FIR. The statement of the prosecutrix was also recorded under Section 180 BNSS in which she has stated that she was molested by the accused-applicant No.2 to 6 and destroyed all the household items. The statements of the independent witnesses namely, Keshav Ram, Ajay Kumar, Smt. Meena Devi, Smt. Maya Devi and Kalaunji were also recorded in which all the witnesses have denied the entire prosecution story and have stated that the occurrence took place three months ago. The Investigating Officer also recorded the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 183 BNSS on 23.12.2024, in which, she has also included the names of the wives of the applicants and has also developed the story. Thereafter, on 07.02.2025, the charge-sheet against the applicants was submitted under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 74 BNS and 9(g)/10 POCSO Act and 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act. It is urged that the applicants No.1 to 5, there is no criminal history except the present case, however, the applicant No.6 has criminal history of one case bearing Case Crime No.0107/2024. It is also urged that there are major contradictions in the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS as such no case is made out against the present applicants. It is also submitted that there is admitted enmity between the family of the accused-applicants. In such circumstances, the applicants are entitled to be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for the anticipatory bail and submits that there are specific and serious allegations against the accused-applicants, including enticement of the victim and outraging the modesty of the prosecutrix. It is submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed by the investigating officer. In the aforesaid context, the applicants are required to seek regular bail rather than anticipatory bail where the presence of the applicants and their involvement have prima-facie been seen and deposed before the Court. Considering the facts and circumstances as well as looking into the statements of the complainant as well as prosecutrix, which have been brought on record, it has clearly indicated the involvement of the applicants. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to grant the benefit of the anticipatory bail. Consequently, the present anticipatory bail application is dismissed. However, it shall be open for the applicant to seek regular bail and in case such an application is moved, the same shall be considered and decided by the Court concerned on its own merit. Order Date :- 3.6.2025 Rakesh/- Digitally signed by :- RAKESH PRAJAPAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench