Subhash Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Shri Chhote Lal Yadav, learned Advocate has put in appearance and filed vakalatnama on behalf of informant/ Respondent No.2, which is taken on record.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State.

¶11

The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C./ 482 BNSS has been filed by the accused-applicant who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Case Crime No.0091/2026, under Sections 75(1), 352, 351(3), 64(1), 115(2) of BNS, 2023 (old sections354A, 504, 506, 376(1), 323 IPC) and Section 66E of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, Police Station - Kaiserganj, District - Bahraich.

¶12

The brief facts of the case are that as per F.I.R. dated 09.04.2026 lodged under Sections 75, 352, 351(3) of BNS 2023 and Section 66E of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, alleging therein that the photographs of the victim, who is the informant herself, were taken by the informant without her consent and he used to harass her by doing indecent things and threatened her on the pretext of making viral the indecent photographs taken by the applicant. After recording the statement of the victim under Section 180 and 183 BNSS Sections 64(1) and 115(2) BNS have been added.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the informant / victim for the first time in her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS has made an allegation that the applicant used to blackmail her for establishing physical relationship on the pretext of

¶14

NABAIL No. 976 of 2026

¶15

2

¶16

making viral the indecent photographs edited by him.

¶17

It is further submitted that the informant is the victim herself and if the applicant used to blackmail her regarding physical relationship forcibly then why the victim / informant had not made any such allegation at the time of the lodging of the F.I.R.

¶18

It is further submitted that as per her own admitted case she is 23 years of age i.e. she is major. The applicant and informant/ victim are good friends and are in love with each other and in support of his submission he has drawn the attention of this Court to page nos.36 to 62 which are the photographs of the informant / victim with the applicant, wherein she is comfortably getting the photographs clicked with the applicant and from page Nos. 63 to 73 to the paper book the whatsapp chats have been enclosed wherein the informant / victim herself texted the messages to the applicant which show that the they were in love with each other and the relationship was consensual and now the applicant is falsely being implicated in the present case.

¶19

It is further submitted that the applicant and the victim are distant relatives and they used to go out at several places for picnic etc. Meanwhile the prosecutrix / victim borrowed a huge amount of money from the applicant and later on she refused to return it and to put pressure on the applicant the aforesaid F.I.R. has been lodged.

¶20

It is also submitted that the applicant was called to the police station on 22.02.2026 and his mobile was taken away and even after that the objectionable photoes are still being circulated on social media. The applicant himself had given a letter to SHO Kaisarganj on 25.02.2026 with regard to the same.

¶21

It is also submitted that the informant/ victim herself has denied for internal medical examination.

¶22

It is further submitted that the police is continuously raided the house of the applicant as the police wants to arrest him and the applicant is apprehending his arrest.

¶23

It is further submitted that the applicant on oath has specifically stated in paragraph no. 32 that he will co-operate in the trial in future and he will not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, if granted.

¶24

It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶25

On the other hand learned AGA and learned counsel for Respondent No.2 have opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and have submitted that the applicant used to harass the informant by blackmailing her; he made forcible physical relationship with the victim on the pretext of making viral the indecent photographs but they are unable to give any reply to the several photographs and messages texted by the informant / victim herself to

¶26

NABAIL No. 976 of 2026

¶27

3

¶28

the applicant, which have been annexed as Annexure No.5 the bail application i.e. from page nos.36 to 73.

¶29

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, prima facie, it is found that the applicant and the informant are distant relatives and they are in love. The informant/ victim used to go with the applicant with her own sweet will. The physical relation prima facie appears to be consensual. The victim is major and she had refused to get her medical examination conducted. The victim herself is the informant but she has not made any allegation of outraging her modesty at the time of lodging of an FIR. She has improved her case at the time of recording her statement under Section 183 BNSS.

¶30

In the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, [AIR 1994 SC 1349], the Apex Court has referred to the third report of National Police Commission wherein it is mentioned that arrests by the police in India is one of the chief source of corruption in the police. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental rights and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative. According to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the peculiar case the arrest of an accused should be made.

¶31

After the lodging of FIR the arrest can be made by the police at will. There is no definite period fixed for the police to arrest an accused against whom an FIR has been lodged. The applicant has not previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by the Court; as undertaken by the learned counsel for the applicant there is no possibility of fleeing from the judicial proceedings and in the light of aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court, this Court finds it a fit case to issue order of anticipatory bail as per Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./ 482 BNSS.

¶32

Upon due consideration of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while granting anticipatory bail to the applicant namely Subhash Yadav till disposal of the trial by appearing before the court concerned and should furnish bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- and sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial/concerned Court/ Investigating Officer, subject to the following conditions:-

¶33

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required and shall not abscond;

¶34

(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; (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

NABAIL No. 976 of 2026

¶37

4

¶38

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

¶39