Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:81341 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3829 of 2025 Applicant :- Raju Alias Lukka And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Upendra Kumar Pushkar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Sri Akal Raj Singh, Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 4. The same is taken on record. 2. Heard counsel for the applicants, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State, counsel for the opposite party no. 4 and perused the material on record. 3. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Session in Case Crime No. 321 of 2023, under sections 147, 354, 323, 504 of I.P.C. and Sections 7/8 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Palimukimpur, District- Aligarh. 4. Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the instant case. In the first information report, the applicants are alleged to have assaulted the sister of informant and acted indecently with her. In the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C., specific allegation of indecent behaviour has been assigned to the applicant no. 3. The victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. had also stated that earlier there was a dispute between her brother-in-law and the applicant no. 3 with regard to a drain. Counsel for the applicants further contends that no such incident had occurred. The applicant no. 3 had not acted indecently with the victim. Owing to the earlier dispute between the parties, he has been implicated in the present case. There are inconsistencies in the first information report, in the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and in the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Further, during the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have settled their differences and entered into compromise dated 27.02.2025 annexed as Annexure No. 8 to the affidavit. Investigation has been completed. Charge-sheet has been filed. The applicants had cooperated in the investigation. The applicants have been summoned by the concerned court. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest in the above mentioned case. In case, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Counsel for the opposite party no. 4/informant does not dispute the submissions raised by counsel for the applicants. He submits that the informant has no objection if the present application is allowed. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 7. Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the applicants, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicants and the fact that there are inconsistencies in the first information report, in the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and in the statement of the victim under Sections 164 Cr.P.C., the fact that during the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have settled their differences and entered into compromise dated 29.02.2025, at this stage, there is no substantive evidence against the applicants, charge-sheet has been filed, the applicants had cooperated in the investigation and no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 8. In the event of arrest, the applicants Raju @ Lukka, Pappu, Idrish and Karru, 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 applicants shall make themselves available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (ii) the applicants 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 applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport the same shall be deposited by them before the concerned court. 9. 9. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same. 10. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 16.5.2025 Sachin Mishra Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad