Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 156187 (ALL)

RAJU PRASAD SAROJ v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO AND ANOTHER

NABAIL/991/2025 · 2025-08-08

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46386 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 991 of 2025 Applicant :- Raju Prasad Saroj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Awasthi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. 3. In view of the proposed order being passed, notices to respondent No.2 is dispensed with. 4. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.487 of 2025, under Sections 64(1), 352, 351(3) of BNS, P.S. Kotwali Sadar, District Kheri. 5. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is Teacher in a Central Government School. Victim is also a Teacher posted at a primary school. Applicant is married. It is submitted that both applicant and the victim are in relationship for years. Applicant has given monetary support to the victim. Attention of the court has been invited towards the bank statement of the applicant. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer submitting that victim has supported the prosecution case in her statement under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS. He also produced the objectionable photographs as well as the chatting from the sister-in-law of the victim. He submits that a perusal of these chatting show that victim was subjected to blackmailing. 7. Learned A.G.A. also submits that custodial interrogation is necessary in this matter. It is not a case of false implication and prima facie complicity of the applicant is evident. 8. Perused the record. 9. In view of submissions made hereinabove so also the material collected by the Investigating Officer so far, statement of the victim under Sections 180 & 183 BNSS this Court is of the opinion that it is not a case of false implication and thus, the anticipatory bail application is dismissed. Order Date :- 8.8.2025 Saurabh Yadav/- Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench