Dismissed¶15

Anuj v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 Feb 2025NABAIL/574/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail rejected; Section 482 BNSS; B.N.S. Sections 333, 74, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(4), 79; POCSO Section 7/8; Case Crime No. 344 of 2024; Police Station Thakurdwara; District Moradabad; outrage of modesty; charge-sheet submitted; summons issued; cognizance taken; apprehension of imminent arrest; no coercive action for two weeks or till surrender; surrender and regular bail to be decided expeditiously; Anuj v. State of U.P. and 3 others; Allahabad High Court; Deepak Verma, J.; 2025:AHC:22968.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application rejected; limited interim relief only: if the applicant surrenders before the court below within two weeks and applies for regular bail, the application is to be decided expeditiously, and no coercive action shall be taken against him for two weeks or till surrender, whichever is earlier.

Anuj Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS should be granted to the applicant Anuj in Case Crime No. 344 of 2024 (Sections 333, 74, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(4), 79 B.N.S. and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Thakurdwara, District Moradabad). +1 more

¶8

Court's answer

Anticipatory bail refused: without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and considering the submissions advanced and the nature and gravity of the accusation, the court found no good ground for anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

If the applicant surrenders before the concerned court below within two weeks from today and applies for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law.

¶16

Key takeaways

For the period of two weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him.ratio¶17
Stated object of the anticipatory-bail provision: that a person should not be unnecessarily harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy personal vendetta or grudge of complainant or any other person operating the things directly or from behind the curtains.obiter¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Deepak Verma, J.), order dated 18.02.2025, in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. 574 of 2025 (neutral citation 2025:AHC:22968): The anticipatory bail application of applicant Anuj in Case Crime No. 344 of 2024 (Sections 333, 74, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(4), 79 B.N.S. and Section 7/8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Thakurdwara, District Moradabad) was rejected. The charge-sheet had been submitted and cognizance taken, and summons issued against the applicant. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, and considering the submissions and the nature and gravity of the accusation, the court found no good ground for anticipatory bail. As an alternative measure, the court directed that if the applicant surrenders before the court below within two weeks and applies for regular bail, the application be decided expeditiously in accordance with law, and that no coercive action be taken against him for two weeks or till surrender, whichever is earlier.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:22968

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 574 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Anuj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

As per office report dated 17.02.2025, notice has been served through brother upon opposite party no.2 & notice served through office upon opposite party no.3.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicant for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No.344 of 2024, under Sections 333, 74, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(4), 79 B.N.S. & Section 7/8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Thakurdwara, District Moradabad.

¶9

Allegation in the FIR is that the applicant and three unknown persons entered in the house of informant and outraged her modesty. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Applicant has also lodged FIR and he has received injuries. Statement of the victim has not supported the prosecution witness. Investigating Officer has submitted chargesheet and trial court has issued summons against the applicant. 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 A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. From perusal of FIR and statement of the victim, prima-facie offence is made out against the applicant. It is not a case of false implication. Moreover, charge-sheet has been submitted and court has taken cognizance. The applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant may be rejected.

¶11

The object of Section 482 B.N.S. is that a person should not be

¶12

unnecessarily harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy personal vendetta or grudge of complainant or any other person operating the things directly or from behind the curtains.

¶13

It is well settled that discretionary power conferred by the legislature on this Court cannot be put in a straitjacket formula but such discretionary power either grant or refusal of anticipatory bail has to be exercised carefully in appropriate cases with circumspection on the basis of the available material after evaluating the facts of the particular case and considering other relevant factors (nature and gravity of accusation, role attributed to accused, conduct of accused, criminal antecedents, possibility of the applicant to flee from justice, apprehension of tempering of the witnesses or threat to the complainant, impact of grant of anticipatory bail in investigation or society etc.) with meticulous precision maintaining balance between the conflicting interest, namely, sanctity of individual liberty and interest of society.

¶14

Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case and considering the submissions advanced, the nature and gravity of the accusation, I find no good ground for anticipatory bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶15

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant- Anuj, involved in aforesaid case crime is, hereby, rejected .

¶16

Considering the aforesaid alternative prayer of the applicant, it is directed that if applicant surrenders before the concerned court below within two weeks from today and applies for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law.

¶17

For the period of two weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶18

Order Date :- 18.2.2025 SKD

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anuj v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuj v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases