Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:6136 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 247 of 2025 Applicant :- Tahir Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Laxmi Kant Bhatt, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri Anand Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer and also perused the record. 3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 243 of 2024, under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Mainather, District Moradabad, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail. PROSECUTION STORY: 4. The applicant, who happens to be father-in-law of the victim, is stated to have committed rape with her on 10.5.2024 in the night of about 1.00 a.m. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT: 5. The applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has the apprehension of his arrest. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. 6. The FIR is delayed by more than two months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Even the application in compliance of Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. has been moved on 28.5.2024, which itself is delayed by about 18 days and subsequently, the application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved on 13.6.2024, which is delayed by about one month and there is no explanation to it either. In the meantime, the informant had instituted another FIR No. 185 of 2024 on 18.6.2024 and there is no whisper of a single word about the instant incident. The victim has not sustained any injuries, whatsoever. The instant case is just a misuse of the process of law. 7. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. 8. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/OPPOSITE PARTY: 9. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail has been opposed but the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history has not been disputed. CONCLUSION: 10. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case. 11. Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. 12. In the event of arrest of the applicant, Tahir involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:- i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii. that 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court; iv. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; 13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant. 14. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 15.1.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad