Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:7273 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2207 of 2024 Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Soni Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Prasad Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. 2. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the accused-applicant on anticipatory bail in Case case crime No.117 of 2024 under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C., P.S. Shridutt Ganj, District Balrampur. 3. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 25.09.2024, the following order was passed:- "1.The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.117 of 2024 under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C., P.S. Shridutt Ganj, district Balrampur. 2.Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 3.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the complainant in case crime No.14 of 2024 under sections 363, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Shriduttganj, district Balrapur. Aggrieved by the act of the investigating officer for not registering case under POCSO Act, he moved an application before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balrampur for further investigation. That application has been rejected with a cost of Rs.2000/- by order dated 4.7.2024 passed in the aforesaid case crime with a further direction to the police to register first information report against the applicant and inform the Court. It is submitted by applicant's counsel that he will challenge the said order dated 4.7.2024 in a separate proceeding. However, since the first information report has been lodged, it cannot be maintained in view of specific bar under section 195 CrPC and the only course is to file a compliant under section 340 CrPC. The applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. In support of his contention, learned counsel has relied on a judgment of Supreme Court in B.K. Gupta versus Damodar H. Bajaj and others [2001(42) ACC 1074 (SC). 4.Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation. 5.Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer made by applicant's counsel but could not dispute the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 6.List on 3.10.2024. In the meantime, learned A.G.A. shall file objections/counter affidavit. 8.Considering the above aspects of the matter, provisions of section 195 CrPC as also judgment referred to above, the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he will cooperate in the investigation, perusal of the record and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 9.In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer. 10.The applicant shall cooperate in the investigationl and he will not influence the witnesses. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this order." 4. From perusal of the order dated 25.09.2024, it transpires that 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 thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to substantiate that the present applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings. 5. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Sunil Kumar Soni 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. 6. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. Order Date :- 4.2.2025 Mohd. Sharif Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench