HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9575 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant and Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.227 of 2026 under Sections 61(2), 87 BNS, Police Station-Bairia, District- Ballia, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the abovementioned case. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is the brother- in-law of the co-accused Samarjeet Singh. The victim was supposedly abducted by the applicant and the co-accused and her whereabouts are still not traceable. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the averments made in the FIR, which has been lodged after about 26 days of the occurrence, are in stark contrast to the missing person's report that was lodged on 23.06.2026. Learned counsel for the applicant has further contended that the victim used to talk with the co-accused Samarjeet Singh on phone and the allegation against the applicant in the FIR is only to create pressure on the co-accused. The applicant has a criminal history of five other cases but the said cases are minor cases not involving in the event of a conviction a punishment of more than seven years. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajeet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pawan @ Ashish Kumar Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and has contended that the victim has not yet been recovered. The applicant is specifically named in the F.I.R. and he may be required for custodial interrogation and recovery of the victim. He does not dispute the fact that the applicant is on bail in all the previous cases shown against him. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the parties. 6. A perusal of the missing person's report that was registered after four days of the occurrence indicates that there is no allegation against any of the accused. The F.I.R. itself has been lodged with a delay of almost 26 days. From the perusal of the bail rejection order it appears that from the case diaries it was found that it was the accused Samarjeet Singh who allegedly eloped with the victim with the assistance and conspiracy of the applicant. The false implication of the applicant being the brother-in-law of the co-accused Samarjeet Singh cannot be ruled out. The case of the applicant is on a different footing from that of the co-accused Samarjeet Singh. As the victim has not yet been recovered it would not be appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant beyond the conclusion of police investigation. 7. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Till conclusion of investigation, in the event of the arrest of the applicant-Pawan @ Ashish Kumar Singh, he shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court concerned with the following conditions:- i. 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; NABAIL No. 9575 of 2026 2 iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness; 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail. 10. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case. September 30, 2026 A. Pandey NABAIL No. 9575 of 2026 3 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad