HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1022 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant apprehending his arrest in Case Crime No. 254 of 2021, under Sections 452, 376D, 147, 323, 506 IPC, Police Station Tikoniya, District Lakhimpur Kheri. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Notices to respondent no. 2 are dispensed with in view of the proposed order. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 14.10.2021 at about 8:00 p.m., while the husband of the informant was not at home, the accused persons entered the house of the prosecutrix and co-accused Nabi Husain @ Kallu raped her. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegation of rape, as disclosed in the statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., is only against the co-accused Nabi Husain @ Kallu, who has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 01.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2152 of 2024. In both the aforesaid statements, the prosecutrix has not levelled any allegation of rape against the present applicant. It is further submitted that the case of the applicant stands on a better footing than that of the co-accused. The applicant has also explained the criminal history of one case in the supplementary affidavit filed today. FIR has been registered through an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., without any explanation for delay. The victim is a married lady, and in her medico- legal examination, no abnormality or corroborative material has been found. The applicant, therefore, seeks parity with the co-accused Nabi Husain @ Kallu, who has been granted anticipatory bail. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, however, he does not dispute that the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Adarsh Shukla, Prince Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Nasim Khan .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) case of the applicant is on a better footing than that of the co-accused, who has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. On due consideration to the overall facts and circumstances, particularly the fact that in the statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. the allegation of rape has not been made against the present applicant, that co-accused Nabi Husain @ Kallu has already been granted anticipatory bail, and that charge-sheet has been filed, this Court finds that no useful purpose would be served by sending the applicant to jail at this stage. Accordingly, in light of the judgment of Musheer Alam v. State of U.P., [(2025) SCC OnLine SC 116], and without entering into the merits of the case, it would be appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Since, charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, the applicant is directed to surrender himself before the trial court within twenty days from today. In case of such surrender, the trial court shall enlarge the applicant Nasim Khan on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned 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; Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed. 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. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. September 18, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S ABAIL No. 1022 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench