Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86986 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4795 of 2024 Applicant :- Sushant Rawat Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Srivastava WITH Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6929 of 2024 Applicant :- Sudhir Rawat And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard Sri Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants in both the anticipatory bail applications, Sri Manoj Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 4795 of 2024 and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been moved by the applicants Sushant Rawat, Sudhir Rawat, Suresh @ Sarvesh Rawat, Smt. Ruchi Rawat, Smt. Malti Rawat seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.313 of 2022, under Sections 376(2)N, 328, 504, 506 I.P.C., Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 67 of Information Technology Act, Police Station Kakadev, District Kanpur Nagar, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that talk of marriage of applicant Sushant Rawat with the informant/prosecutrix was going on, thereafter the marriage was settled between the parties. He further submits that the allegations against the applicant Sushant Rawat is that he took undue advantage of settlement of marriage had made physical relations with the victim. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court to the statement of the victi recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and argued that there is no allegation of threat or coercion has been levelled against the applicant Sushant Rawat, rather the victim had gone with the applicant out of her own free will and consent, who is aged about 30 years. Learned counsel next argued that the applicants Sudhir Rawat and Suresh @ Sarvesh Rawat are bothers, whereas the Smt. Malti Devi is mother and Smt. Ruchi Rawat is the Babhi of the applicant Sushant Rawat, with whom the marriage was settled, who have also been victimed of false accusation. It is thus contended that the false and bald allegations have been levelled against all the family members of the applicant Sushant Rawat. Learned counsel next argued that the ingredients of Section 3/4 of D.P.Act and Section 67 of Information Technology Act is also not made out. 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. 4. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the application for anticipatory bail and argued that the applicant Sushant Rawat on the pretext of marriage has committed the offence and that the remaining applicants are also equally responsible in commission of the offence, therefore the applicants do not deserve any indulgence by this Court. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 8. In the event of arrest of the applicants Sushant Rawat, Sudhir Rawat, Suresh @ Sarvesh Rawat, Smt. Ruchi Rawat, Smt. Malti Rawat 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. 9. 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