HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 6117 of 2025 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard Sri Shiv Shankar Kaithal, Sri Yagyavalk Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the case. 2. This application under Section 482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 261 of 2024, under Sections 376, 384, 452, 506 IPC, Police Station- Linepar, District Firozabad. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per the allegations in the first information report, the necessary ingredients of offence is missing hence no offence is made out against the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially the applicant had filed anticipatory bail application and this Court vide order dated 19.11.2024 had allowed the anticipatory bail application and applicant was granted protection till submission of police report, if any, under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that investigating officer without conducting proper investigation, has illegally submitted charge sheet dated 17.12.2024 against the applicant and on the said charge sheet, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad has taken cognizance on 17.02.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident took place on 08.03.2024 and its FIR was lodged on 10.09.2024 without giving explanation for delay in lodging the FIR. It is submitted that the victim Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shiv Shankar Kaithal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Kalicharan .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) has borrowed money of Rs. 50,000/- from the applicant for supporting the business of her husband and when the applicant demanded his money, she has lodged the present false FIR against the applicant. It is next submitted that the applicant and victim are major and they fell in love with each other for the last one year but in the meantime some dispute has arises between them and both breakup their relationship. It is further submitted that no injury has been reported in the medical report. It is also submitted that the investigation is completed and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. Hence, a prayer to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail is made out till conclusion of trial. 5. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. recorded before the Trial Court has clearly levelled specific allegations against the applicant. The statements of prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and under Section 164 Cr.P.C. corroborated with each other. The Investigating Officer after conducting due inquiry, has filed charge sheet against the applicant and the cognizance of the same has already been taken by the Trial Court. The innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on anticipatory bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, statements of prosecutrix recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., nature of acquisition, likelihood of tampering with evidence in case of release on bail as well as likelihood of fleeing from course of justice, there appears to be no ground for bail as prayed. 7. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail Application stands rejected. August 14, 2025 v.k.updh. NABAIL No. 6117 of 2025 2 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad