HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1312 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed in Case Crime/FIR No.150 of 2025, under Sections 64(1) BNS and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Nigoha, District Lucknow. In the prosecution case it is alleged that the informant who is aged about 16 years on 13.08.2025 at about 8:30 a.m. went along with her father to the medical store of Sunil Kumar-the applicant for purchasing medicine. It is stated that Sunil Kumar sent her father Sushil Kumar with a prescription to purchase an injection from some other medical store and the applicant called the informant inside his medical store and with bad intention forcibly removed her clothes and attempted to commit obscene acts with her. On protest by the informant, she managed to come out from the medical store. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in the First Information Report, the victim has not alleged the offence of rape. However, in her subsequent statement under Section 183 BNSS, an improvement has been made by introducing the allegation of rape. It is argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that no abnormality has been detected in the medico-legal examination of the victim and that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. Perused the record, including the statements of the victim under Sections Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Annapurna Agnihotri Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Suneel Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 180 and 183 BNSS, as well as the case diary placed by learned A.G.A. On perusal of the statements of the victim under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, it is evident that the victim has leveled specific allegations against the present applicant, which prima facie attract the provisions of Section 64(1) BNSS read with Sections 3/4 of the POCSO Act. Considering the gravity and seriousness of the allegations made by the victim, this Court finds that the offence alleged is of a grave nature and carries severe punishment under law. The allegations prima facie disclose commission of an offence punishable under Section 64(1) BNSS read with Sections 3/4 of the POCSO Act, which are both cognizable and non-bailable in nature. The plea of false implication raised on behalf of the applicant does not find support from the material available on record at this stage. It cannot be inferred that the allegations have been made merely to tarnish the reputation of the applicant. Anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy intended to be exercised in exceptional circumstances where the Court is satisfied that the applicant has been falsely implicated or where there exists no material to justify custodial interrogation. In the present case, in view of the nature of accusation, the specific allegations made by the victim, and the seriousness of the offence, this Court does not find it to be a fit case where the discretionary jurisdiction for grant of anticipatory bail should be exercised in favour of the applicant. Accordingly, the application, being devoid of merit, is rejected. September 18, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S NABAIL No. 1312 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench