Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11931 Court No. - 8 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2588 of 2024 Applicant :- Bheem @ Bheem Gaud Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Praveen Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. The instant application has been preferred by the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.429 of 2021 under Sections 323, 354a, 354b, 504, 506 IPC 7/8 POCSO Act & 3(1)da, 3(1)dha, 3(2)va SC/ST Act relating to Police Station Kandhai, District Pratapgarh. The applicant has moved the instant application seeking anticipatory bail and it has been submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the instant matter. It is urged that as per the allegations contained in the FIR, it is alleged that the daughter of the complainant who is a 15 years old minor, and on 01.12.2021 in the evening had gone to the outskirts of the village to answer the natures call. It is further urged that applicant who had been stalking the victim and upon getting an opportunity, disrobed the victim and inappropriately touched her. The victim some how freed herself from the clutches of the applicant and reached home where she narrated the incident to her mother who thereafter went on to confront the applicant and his family members. It is further alleged that the family members of the applicant rebuked the victim and her family members also accosted them. It is urged by the learned counsel for the applicant that the FIR has been lodged after ten days which is belated and moreover the statement of the victim is at variance with the statement which was recorded in terms of Section 161 Cr.P.C as well as Section 164 Cr.P.C. It is further urged that there was no material which could indicate that the allegations as made in regard to the said incident was made out and it is urged that an attempt is being made only the malign and trouble the applicant and his family members. It is further submitted that the applicant has stable household and his father namely Hari Shankar @ Dahpel and his mother namely Madhu @ Dhurka approached this Court seeking protection in a Criminal Misc Anticipatory Bail Application no.700 of 2024 wherein this Court by means of the order dated 02.04.2024 had granted protection by allowing anticipatory bail application and in the aforesaid circumstances, the applicant too is entitled to anticipatory bail. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application and has submitted that the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C clearly corroborates the version of the complainant in the FIR. It is urged that the charge sheet has been filed on 07.04.2022 and prima facie material has been collected from the statement of various persons including independent witnesses which give credence to the version in the FIR and in such circumstances, the applicant may not be granted anticipatory bail. The Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material on record. From a perusal of the material on record, FIR as well as statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C there is a very clear averment of the victim who was a 15 years old minor who clearly stated that the applicant had disrobed her and had inappropriately touched her with an intent, she some how got away from the clutches of the applicant. The aforesaid statement is to be tested in trial which is to be considered on its own merit. The mere fact that the father and the mother of the applicant were granted the benefit of anticipatory bail does not come to the aid of the applicant, in as much as, the averments are primarily against the applicant and not against the father and mother. The allegations against the parents of the applicant is on different premise. Clear allegations against the applicant does not permit this Court to grant anticipatory bail at this stage. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application is rejected. However, in case, if the applicant moves the appropriate court in accordance with law, needless to say his application for regular bail shall be considered as per settled legal principles as laid down by the Apex Court. Order Date :- 27.2.2025 Harshita Digitally signed by :- HARSHITA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench