HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8131 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Laloo Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. 3. Learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 24.09.2024. 4. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.0374 of 2022 registered under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act at Police Station- Hasanpur, District Amroha with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail. 5. This is the second anticipatory bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first one was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 25.11.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 CR.P.C. No.10068 of 2022 and the following order was passed:- "Sri Laloo Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present bail application may be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to take proper recourse at appropriate forum. In view of the statement so made, the present bail application is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. The certified copy of the orders and other relevant documents shall be Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kiran Rani, Laloo Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Raja Urf Mohd Amir .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) returned to the counsel for the applicant as per the Rules of the High Court after obtaining photostat copies, which shall be kept on record." 6. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have established corporeal relationship with the victim on the false promise of marriage and had later on refused to comply with the said promise. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The victim by her looks seems to be major, although as per ossification test report, she is stated to be 17 years old. There is no clinching evidence to suggest that the applicant misled the victim from the beginning. The informant has converted a failed consensual physical relationship into a criminal case. 8. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that summons were issued against the applicant in July, 2025 itself. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail. 9. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant. 10. The Supreme Court in Jaya Mala vs. State of J & K, (1982) 2 SCC 538 and Mohd. Imran Khan vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), (2011) 10 SCC 192 has opined that the radiologist cannot predict the correct date of birth rather there is a long margin of 1 to 2 years on either side. 11. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the NABAIL No. 8131 of 2025 2 Supreme Court. 12. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Raja Urf Mohd Amir be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i). 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; (ii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iii). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (iv). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (v). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. 13. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial. October 14, 2025 (Ravi Kant) NABAIL No. 8131 of 2025 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad