HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1095 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Abhishek Srivastava, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Mohd. Asif Khan, the learned Additional Government Advocate- I, appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.0151 of 2024, under Sections 74, 351(2), 352 B.N.S. 2023 and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Tikonia, District Lakhimpur Kheri. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 27.07.2024 at about 19.11 Hrs. against the applicant and his brothers Akash and Manoj and two unknown persons stating that while the informant's daughter aged about 15 years and his niece aged about 14 years were going to get some flowers near a place of worship, the accused persons molested them and tried to forcibly drag them. The informant alleged that an unsuccessful attempt of molestation of his daughter was made about six months ago also. 5. 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 for the reason that on 21.07.2024 the applicant's brother (co-accused in this case) had lodged F.I.R. No.143 of 2024 against four persons including the informant's two brothers alleging that those persons had entered the applicant's house, beaten him up and hurled castist abuses. He has submitted that the present F.I.R. has been lodged on false allegations in retaliation. 6. A supplementary has also been filed on behalf of the applicant showing his involvement in another criminal case, but the learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has not received any summons/notice in that case. The Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Atul @ Atul Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. And 4 Others .....Opposite Party(s) supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 7. In the statement of the victims recorded by the Investigating Officer they stated that the accused persons had molested them and when they raised a hue and cry the accused persons ran away. They further stated that no person present nearby came to their rescue. 8. The medico legal examination report of the victims did not reveal anything significant. In the statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS some further allegations were levelled which were not there in the F.I.R. or in the statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS. 9. The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and he has submitted that the victims are minors, the offence is of heinous nature and the applicant is not entitled to be granted pre-arrest bail. He has submitted that the information of the present application has been delivered to the complainant through police. However, no one had put in appearance on behalf of the complainant/victims to oppose the application. 10. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that six days prior to lodging of present F.I.R. the applicant's brother (co-accused in this case) had lodged an F.I.R. against the family members of the present informant alleging beating and hurling castiest abuses, it is alleged that the present F.I.R. has been lodged in retaliation, although the incident took place near a place of worship; that the Investigating Officer has not recorded statement of any independent witness and the victims have improved their version regarding the incident in their statements recorded under Section 183 BNSS, 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. 10. 10. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant- Atul @ Atul Kumar 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 NABAIL No. 1095 of 2025 2 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. August 28, 2025 A.Nigam NABAIL No. 1095 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench