HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4348 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. This case has been taken up on a mention. 2. Heard Sri Rohit Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 1150 of 2017 under Sections 363, 366, 120B IPC and Section 17/18 POCSO Act, Police Station Zafarabad, District Jaunpur with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 4. At the very outset, learned AGA submits that notice on the first informant has been served. 5. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above- mentioned case. He further submits that no offence is made out against the applicant under Sections 363 and 366 IPC. It is further submitted that as per allegation alleged in the FIR, main allegation is against the co- accused Harsh Singh and allegation against the applicant is that he supported the main accused in commission of the offence. It is further submitted that the victim in her statement under Section 161 CrPC stated that the applicant gave money to co-accused Harsh Singh, however, the victim has not stated anything against the applicant in her statement Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rohit Kumar Pandey, Sunil Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Manoj Kumar Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) recorded under Section 164 CrPC. It is further submitted that notice of summon was served on the applicant on 19.4.2025 and non-bailable warrant was issued against him. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail, however, he does not dispute the factual aspect. 7 I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 8. As per first information report, allegation against the applicant is that he supported the co-accused in commission of the offence. The victim in her statement under Section 161 CrPC has stated that the applicant gave money to the co-accused Harsh Singh, however, nothing has been stated by the victim in her statement under Section 164 CrPC against the applicant. 9. It may be stated that in 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, the 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. 10. 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 applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 11. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. NABAIL No. 4348 of 2025 2 12. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Manoj Kumar Singh involved in the aforesaid case crime, he 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 Court concerned, with the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted 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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant would cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 13. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant herein. October 9, 2025 Abhishek NABAIL No. 4348 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad