ARUN SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 10311 of 2026

Arun Singh
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                               .....Opposite
                                                                     Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)          : K.K. Rao, Sarvjeet Singh Chauhan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)     : G.A.

Court No. - 71
                 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard, the Learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ranjay Kumar and Sri

Dharmendra Singh, the Learned counsels appearing for the informant, the

Learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to make necessary

corrections in the prayer clause forthwith.

3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the

applicant in Special Sessions Case No.20 of 2019 (State of U.P. V/s Pawan

Singh), under Sections 363, 366, 342 and 506 of I.P.C. and Section 16/17

of POCSO Act, arising out of Case Crime No.0079 of 2018, Police

Station- Sisolar, District- Hamirpur, with a prayer to enlarge him on

anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the above-

mentioned case.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was

not named in the F.I.R. The charge sheet was submitted only against the

named accused, who is the brother of the applicant. Learned counsel has

further submitted that during trial, after recording of the statement of

P.W.-2 who is said to be the victim of the case. The applicant has been
                                                     NABAIL No. 10311 of 2026
                               2


summoned to face trial in exercise of powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C.,

vide the order dated 25.02.2026. Learned counsel has further stated that

even otherwise, in the statement of P.W.-2 recorded in Court, no

allegation of any sexual assault or in any manner harming the victim has

been given to the applicant. Learned counsel has stated that on the

contrary, the statement of the victim indicates that it was the applicant and

the other accused who had informed the N.G.O. regarding the victim. The

applicant has no criminal antecedents.

5. Learned counsels for the informant and the Learned A.G.A. have

opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and have contended that

a specific role has been assigned to the applicant in the statement of the

victim recorded in Court. The applicant has rightly been summoned and

the challenge to the summoning order in Criminal Revision No. 2533 of
2026 filed by the applicant and the other co-accused is still pending

consideration of this Court and no interim order has been granted to the

applicant. Learned counsels for the informant and the Learned A.G.A.

have not denied the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents.

6. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for

the parties and perused the material brought on the record.

7. The applicant was not named in the F.I.R. nor was he charge-sheeted.

The statement of P.W.-2 has been recorded before the trial Court and as

per the statement of P.W.-2, it appears that the primary allegations have

been made against the co-accused Pawan Singh. It also appears that the

applicant and the other accused were the ones who handed over the victim

to an N.G.O. and the victim was supposedly then given in custody of her

father by the said N.G.O. when he reached Allahabad along with the

police personnel. In the prima facie opinion of the Court, the case of the
                                                     NABAIL No. 10311 of 2026
                                 3


applicant stands on a different footing from that of the co-accused Pawan

Singh. The applicant has no criminal antecedents.


8. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case and

without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it fit to

enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.

9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant

is allowed.

10. In the event of the arrest of the applicant Arun Singh, he shall be

released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on

furnishing a personal bond and surety each in the like amount to the

satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court

concerned with the following conditions:-

i. the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police

officer as and when required;

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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police

officer;

iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission

of the Court;

iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution

witness;

11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned

shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

12. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively

for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be
                                                                                        NABAIL No. 10311 of 2026
                                                                   4


                                    considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case.


                                                                                     (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
                                    October 1, 2026
                                    Sachin




Digitally signed by :-
SACHIN TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad