Rammohan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Heard Shri Sudhir Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Badrul Hasan, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Ms. Priyanka Chaurasiya, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 and perused the material placed on record.

¶11

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant in relation to Case Crime No.0670/2025,under Section(s) 85, 115(2), 64, 351(3) BNS & 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Bangarmau, District-Unnao.

¶12

Vide order dated 09.01.2026, this Court had protected the interest of the applicant. The order dated 09.01.2026, referred, reads as under : -

¶13

"1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶14

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant in relation to Case Crime No. 0670 of 2025, under Sections- 85, 115(2), 64, 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station- Bangarmau, District- Unnao.

¶15

3. Considered the allegations levelled against the applicant in the FIR in issue, basis of pending criminal proceedings, by the informant/Smt. Anita, who is sister-in-law of the applicant, including the allegations related to establishing physical relations forcefully

¶16

NABAIL No. 29 of 2026

¶17

2

¶18

and also that medical has been denied by the informant and also that entire family of the husband of the informant namely Rajesh has been implicated by her and also the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra and others vs. State of U.P. and others, (2012) 10 SCC 741; Kahkashan Kausar v. State of Bihar, (2022) 6 SCC 599; Achin Gupta vs. State of Haryana and another, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 759; Payal Sharma Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3473; Safiya Bano Alias Shakira and others Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 222 and Mamidi Anil Kumar Reddy Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and another, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 127.

¶19

4. Upon due consideration of the aforesaid including the judgments, referred above, this Court finds that the applicant is entitled to interim protection.

¶20

5. Accordingly, as an interim measure it is provided that in the event of arrest, the accused-applicant- Rammohan be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties (one of family member/close relative) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/Court concerned with the following conditions:(i) That the accused-applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation;

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

6. Issue notice to the opposite party No. 2. Steps in this regard be taken within four working days.

¶24

7. Let the the opposite party No. 2 be informed by the SHO concerned regarding pendency of the instant case.

¶25

8. Learned AGA is directed to communicate this order to the SHO concerned forthwith and place the proof regarding the information given by the S.H.O. concerned to the complainant/victim by way of an affidavit when the case is listed next.

¶26

9. List/put up this application on 09.02.2026 within top 20 cases."

¶27

The learned counsel appearing for the prosecution could not demonstrate from the record that there is any adversarial facts which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail after considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the prosecution also could not point out any fact based upon which it can

¶28

NABAIL No. 29 of 2026

¶29

3

¶30

be inferred that the applicant has not cooperated with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case.

¶31

In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant - Ram Mohan till disposal of the trial, subject to the following conditions:-

¶32

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

¶33

(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/ her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶34

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶35

(iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and

¶36

(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶37