HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8007 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State as well as Shri Pawan Kumar Pandey, learned Advocate who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant along with counter affidavit which is taken on record. 2. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the complainant’s daughter, a BBA student at Sharewood College, Sector-25, Indira Nagar, was studying alongside the applicant. It is further alleged that the applicant hacked her social media and Gmail accounts, thereafter blackmailing and pressurizing her. The applicant is also said to have followed and eve- teased her, as a result of which she went into depression. It is lastly alleged that the applicant threatened her on several occasions and sent inappropriate messages. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant, however, submits that the applicant and the victim had been in a consensual relationship since 2023, which subsequently turned strained, leading to the registration of the present FIR. It is further submitted that the investigation has already been completed and charge sheet has been filed. While filing the charge sheet, the Investigating Officer could not collect any material evidence to establish that the applicant had hacked the social media or Gmail account of the victim and on the basis of that she was blackmailed. No medical prescription has been produced to show that the victim suffered from depression. It is contended that this is a case of false implication. The FIR Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Qazi Sabihur Rahman, Razaur Rahman Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Pawan Kumar Pandey, Rajesh Kumar Agnihotri Anupam Bhatt .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) itself is highly delayed. Moreover, the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS do not inspire confidence, and there is an absence of corroborative material to substantiate the allegations. Both the applicant and the victim are majors, and the applicant is a student with no prior criminal antecedents. 4. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail application, contending that the Investigating Officer has recovered certain messages exchanged between the applicant and the victim, which prima facie show that the applicant extended threats to her. 6. Upon perusal of the record, it is evident that the applicant himself has filed several messages which indicate that there was a relationship between the applicant and the victim. Prima facie, it appears that both are majors and had indeed been in a relationship. There also appears to be a lack of corroborative evidence to substantiate the allegations made in the prosecution case. The applicant is in custody since 20.06.2025 and has no previous criminal antecedents. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances discussed above, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Anupam Bhatt involved in Case Crime No.- 194/2025, U/s-64, 74, 115(2), 123, 351(2), 352 BNS, 2023 and 66C Information Technology Act, P.S.- Gudamba, District-Lucknow, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, BAIL No. 8007 of 2025 2 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. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law. (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). 9. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. August 28, 2025 R.C. BAIL No. 8007 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench