Allowed

Mukesh Bind v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Mar 2025NABAIL/1608/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application under Section 482 BNSS in a POCSO and IPC case arising from an FIR alleging non-consensual relations with a minor. Counsel argued false implication and consensual relationship; State opposed citing prima facie evidence. Court granted anticipatory bail till submission of police report with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail till submission of police report, with conditions including availability for interrogation, no inducement/threats, no leaving India without permission, and passport deposit before SS

Mukesh Bind Vs State of U.P. and Another — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:40726

¶2

Court No. - 67

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1608 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Mukesh Bind Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ajay Giri, Ram Bahadur Singh,G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit, filed today, is taken on record.

¶7

Heard V.P. Singh, Advocate holding brief for Sri Santosh Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; learned counsel for the informant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

This anticipatory bail application (under section 482 B.N.S.S.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 99 of 2024, under Sections 493, 504, 506, 376, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Karimuddinpur, District Ghazipur, during pendency of trial.

¶9

Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Allegation in the F.I.R. is false and baseless. Victim is major. Instant FIR has been lodged with malicious intention only to pressurize the applicant to solemnized marriage. The relationship between the applicant and victim was consensual. The investigation is going on. The applicant has no criminal history. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant is apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation.

¶10

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant with the contention that the applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail as prima facie case is made out. During investigation, pistol and cartridge have been recovered and there is prima facie, evidence against the applicant and investigation is going on. The apprehension of the applicant is not founded on any material on record, only on the basis of imaginary fear, the

¶11

anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

¶12

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case for the limited period considering the exception considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶13

Let the applicant Mukesh Bind , who is involved in the aforesaid crime, be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶15

(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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶17

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶18

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicants.

¶19

The application stands allowed .

¶20

Order Date :- 20.3.2025 Meenu Singh

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mukesh Bind v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Bind v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases