HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7515 of 2025 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Learned A.G.A. on the basis of instructions submits that notice of the present application has been served upon the informant/victim- opposite party no. 2 and the Child Welfare Committee, Agra/ opposite party no. 3 on 9.9.2025. The receiving endorsements as produced by the learned A.G.A. are taken on record. However, no one appears on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 nor any counter affidavit has been filed on their behalf. 2. Heard counsel for the applicants as well as Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.456 of 2023, under sections 354D, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., and 7/8 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, P.S. Khandauli, District Agra. 4. Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case due to certain other dispute between the parties. The applicants did not act inappropriately with the victim. As per the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. the applicants did not make any physical contact with her. It is contended that in absence of physical contact the essential ingredients to constitute the offence punishable under Section 8 of the POCSO is not made out. Further, during the course of investigation, the applicants were granted the benefit of Section 41-A I.P.C. At this stage, there is no credible evidence to link the applicants with the offences. The investigation has been completed. The applicants had cooperated in the investigation. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicants have been summoned by the concerned Court. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest in the above mentioned case. In case, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the said liberty. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sangeeta Shukla, Sushil Kumar Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pushpendra And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants and the fact that as per the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., the applicants did not make any physical contact with her, in absence of physical contact, the essential ingredients to constitute the offence punishable under Section 8 of the POCSO is not made out, during the course of investigation, the applicants were granted the benefit of Section 41-A I.P.C., at this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicants with the offences, the fact that the applicants had cooperated in the investigation and no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled for anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial. 7. In the event of arrest, the applicants Pushpendra and Dilkhush @ Lavkush, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on 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 applicants shall make themselves available on each and every date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (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 from disclosing such facts to the Court; (iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the concerned court. 8. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same. 9. The application stands disposed of. September 23, 2025 S.S. NABAIL No. 7515 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad