Awadhesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:41650

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 467 of 2025

Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

As per the office report, the notices to the complainant are served. However, none appears on behalf of the complainant.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The present application under Section 438 Cr.PC./482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 72 of 2025, under Sections 87, 137(2), 351(3) of B.N.S., P.S. Colonelganj, District Gonda.

¶9

The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.5.2025 has passed the following order:-

¶10

" 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party no.1State.

¶11

2. Issue notice to opposite party no.2.

¶12

3. First Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with regard to Case Crime no.72 of 2025, under Sections 87, 137(2), 351(3) of B.N.S., P.S. Colonelganj, District Gonda.

¶13

4. As per contents of first information report, applicant allegedly enticed away the minor daughter of informant on 09.03.2025.

¶14

5. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against him which could be evident from the fact that statement of victim do not corroborate allegations levelled against applicant. Learned counsel has drawn attention to the statement of victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS to submit that there is also serious contradiction in the same and indicates that negotiations regarding marriage of applicant with the alleged victim were underway and FIR has been lodged only due to failure of aforesaid negotiation. It is submitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history.

¶15

6. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed anticipatory bail but does not dispute the aforesaid facts. It is

¶16

submitted that investigation is still ongoing in which he is cooperating and there is nothing adverse with regard to applicant's cooperation in the investigation.

¶17

7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, it appears that the statement of victim may not corroborate allegations levelled against applicant. The FIR may have been lodged due to failure of negotiation of marriage. Thus, in view of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, it would be appropriate to grant interim anticipatory bail to applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C./482 BNSS.

¶18

8. List this case on 03.06.2025, as fresh, along with service report.

¶19

9. Objections may be filed in the meantime.

¶20

10. In view of above, interim anticipatory bail is granted to applicant providing that in the event of arrest, applicant Awadhesh Kumar shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶21

(i) That the accused-applicant shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation;

¶22

(ii) That the accused-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/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; and

¶23

(iii) That the accused-applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

¶24

(iv) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this order. "

¶25

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been released on interim anticipatory bail after filing of the personal bonds and two sureties. He has duly cooperated in the investigation. Charge-sheet in the case has already been filed. He has not misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail granted by this Court. He has no criminal antecedents. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial and in case, he is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of same.

¶26

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶27

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation so also the fact that chargesheet in the case has already been filed, the applicant has not misused the liberty of anticipatory bail granted by this Court, he has no criminal antecedents coupled with the undertaking given by the applicant that he will cooperate in the trial as also the interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 16.05.2025 is made absolute.

¶28

In view of the aforesaid, the anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶29

Order Date :- 21.7.2025 Shravan

¶30

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Awadhesh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Awadhesh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ajay Kumar Vs U.O.I. Thru Senior Intelligence Officer Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Lko. Zonal Unit

Siddharth Saroj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Riyaz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Pulli @ Puttilal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Gyan Prakash Upadhyay vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Roshan Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept.. Lko