Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11346 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1758 of 2024 Applicant :- Salman Ansari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anamika Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail in FIR No. 1861 of 2013, under Sections 354-B, 504, 506 IPC and Section 18 of POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Sultanpur. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 06.08.2024, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "1. The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.1861/2023, under Sections 354-B, 504, 506 IPC and Section 18 POCSO Act, police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Sultanpur. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as perused the record. 3. As per instructions learned A.G.A. has informed that notice on complainant has been served, however, no one has appeared on behalf of the complainant. 4. In the prosecution case it is alleged that minor sister of the informant when went to Kamal Studio Naka Lucknow to take some photographs and while returning towards they were harassed by Sanjay and Mukhtar co-accused. They caught hold of her hand and with ill intention started dragging them to Raj Studio. Upon alarm being raised by them, two unknown persons came and started snatching purse of the informant sister. After the crowd started gathering and when some people protested, they ran away. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has not taken his name. The prosecutrix refused to record her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate. Except confessional statement of co- accused there is no material with the prosecution to implicate the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history. He further submits that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial. 6. Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. He prays for and is allowed two weeks' time to file objections/counter affidavit. 7. List on 28.8.2024. 8. On due consideration to the fact that the victim has refused to record statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and has not named the applicant in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the applicant has no criminal history as also the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant till the next date of listing. 9. Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant-Salman Ansari shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:- 1. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; 2. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; 3. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; 4. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail. Such other reasonable conditions which the learned trial court may deem fit may be imposed." From perusal of order dated 06.08.2024, it is apparent that the State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly considering the merits of the case.The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceeding or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Salman Ansari till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (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. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this protection. Order Date :- 20.2.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench