Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10349 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2323 of 2024 Applicant :- Sherkhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Counter affidavit filed today by learned Counsel for the State is taken on record. 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 Complaint Case No. 214 of 2023, under Section 354 IPC and Section 3b/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Dargah Shareef, District Bahraich. The notice has been issued to the complainant/opposite party no. 2 and as per office report, the same has been served but no one is present for the complainant/opposite party no. 2. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 04.10.2024, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "The applicant has moved the present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying for grant of anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 214/2023, under Sections 354 IPC and Section 3b/4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Dargah Sharif, District Bahraich. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. None appears on behalf of the complainant, even though, notices to respondent no. 2 are served as per the instructions provided by the learned AGA. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the alleged offence is said to have been committed on 14.08.2023. An application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was given after one month and nineteen days without there being any explanation of the delay. The police during investigation has found that no such offence was committed. A report to this effect has been given by the Sub Inspector Indrajeet Yadav on 18.11.2023 to the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge POCSO Act, Bahraich along with report on the application given by the complainant to the Superintendent of Police Bahraich wherein she had stated that the accused are innocent. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant and the victim are resident of separate police stations and hence, there was no occasion for her to identify him and know the name of the applicant. It is a case of false implication. It is submitted that the applicant is innocent. The applicant has never absconded. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial. Two weeks' time is granted to learned AGA to file objections/ counter affidavit. List on 22.10.2024. On due consideration to the submission advanced as well as police report and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent, so also the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case in the light of judgment of Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, subject to his cooperation in the trial. In view of the above, the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court within twenty days from today. The accused applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the following conditions. (i) 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 tamper with the evidence; (ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail; It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses." From perusal of the order dated 04.10.2024, 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 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, Sherkhan 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 :- 17.2.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench