Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86884 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4884 of 2024 Applicant :- Viresh Alias Rahul Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Kameshwar Singh,Sudhanshu Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. With Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3704 of 2024 Applicant :- Hardesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Kameshwar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard Sri Kameshwar Singh learned counsel for the applicants in both the anticipatory bail applications, Sri Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 3704 of 2024 and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been moved by the applicants Viresh alias Rahul Kumar and Hardesh Kumar seeking anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No. 54 of 2021, under Sections 376D, 506 I.P.C., and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Sikanderpur Vaishya, District Kasganj, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. Vide order dated 15.05.2024, co-ordinate Bench of this Court had granted interim anticipatory bail to the applicant after issuing notice to the opposite party no.2 and connecting the instant anticipatory bail with Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 3704 of 2024 (Hardesh Kumar Vs. St ate of U.P. and others) and in connected bail application, the applicant Hardesh Kumar has also been granted interim anticipatory bail, vide order dated 12.04.2024. 4. Sri Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel has filed his counter affidavit in connected anticipatory bail application. 5. Apart from several other merit issues arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the applicants has argued that the matter has been compromised between the parties. It is thus contended that there is no credible evidence against the applicants and that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. It has also been submitted that applicants has no criminal antecedents and the applicants undertake to co-operate during the trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail but could dispute the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicants. 7. Learned counsel for the informant has argued that the matter has been compromised between the parties and therefore, he has no objection in case, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. 8. Perusal of the record counter affidavit filed in connected anticipatory bail application shows that learned counsel did not rebut the averments made in the connected bail application. Learned counsel for the informant has also filed compromise deed entered into between the parties, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-CA1 to that anticipatory bail application. In the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 9. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 10. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 11. In the event of arrest of the applicants Viresh alis Rahul Kumar and Hardesh Kumar involved in the aforesaid case shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court subject to the following conditions :- (i) the applicants shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) the applicants would co-operate during investigation and trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. 12. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. Order Date :- 22.5.2025 S.Ali Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad