Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:53519 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2339 of 2025 Applicant :- Raj Kumar Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Learned AGA submits that notice of the instant application has been served upon the Child Welfare Committee-opposite party no.3 and the informant-opposite party no.4 on 25.03.2025 and 27.03.2025 respectively. However, no one appears on their behalf nor any counter affidavit has been filed. Receiving endorsements produced by learned AGA, are taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P.Tripathi, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This application under Section 482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 658 of 2022, under Sections 363 IPC and Section 16/17 of POCSO Act, Police Station Meja, District Prayagraj. 4. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The victim is a major girl. The victim in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. stated that she was aged 19 years and had gone voluntarily with the co-accused Ravi Shankar Shukla at Puna. At Puna she married the co-accused Ravi Shankar Shukla and stayed with him for more than eight months. She is pregnant and wanted to live with co-accused Ravi Shankar Shukla. There is no allegation against the applicant in the said statement. However, the victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. narrated another version. The contradictions in the statement of the victim under Sections 161 Cr.P.C and 164 Cr.P.C. discredits the prosecution case. During the course of investigation, the applicant was granted benefit under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. At this stage there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Investigation has been completed. Charge sheet has been submitted. The applicant had co-operated in the investigation. The applicant has been summoned by the concerned court. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. In case, the applicant is released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial, he will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, in particular, the fact, that the victim in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. stated that she was aged 19 years and she had gone voluntarily with the co-accused Ravi Shankar Shukla at Puna and had married him, there is no allegation against the applicant in the said statement. However, the victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. stated a contrary version, during the course of investigation, the applicant was granted benefit under Section 41-A Cr.P.C, at this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence, charge sheet has been submitted, the applicant had co-operated in the investigation, no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 7. In the event of arrest, the applicant Raj Kumar Mishra, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall make himself available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court; (iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court. 8. 8. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same. 9. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 11.4.2025 Lbm/- Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad