Allahabad High Court
ABHISHEK SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, Abhishek Singh, under Section 482 CrPC.
Summary
Abhishek Singh applied for anticipatory bail in a case involving offences under Sections 363, 366, 342, 506 IPC and Sections 16/17 of the POCSO Act. He was not named in the FIR nor charge‑sheeted; the FIR named his cousin Pawan Singh as the primary accused. The victim’s statement recorded in court indicated that Singh and another accused handed the victim over to an NGO, with no allegation of sexual assault against Singh. The court noted Singh’s clean record and that the primary allegations were against the co‑accused, and therefore found his situation distinct from the main accused. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the court granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions, stating that any breach could lead to cancellation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to a person not named in the FIR but summoned under Section 319 CrPC.
- Whether the alleged act of handing the victim to an NGO constitutes a ground to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether pending criminal revision affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 319, 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 342, 363, 366, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 16, 17
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- FIR
- charge sheet
- POCSO Act
- sexual assault
- bail conditions
- no criminal antecedents
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 10314 of 2026
Abhishek 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 cousin 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
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
NABAIL No. 10314 of 2026
2
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. Similarly situated co-accused
Arun Singh has been enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court today in
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S
482 BNSS No. - 10311 of 2026.
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
applicant stands on a different footing from that of the co-accused Pawan
Singh. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Similarly situated co-
accused Arun Singh has been enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court
today in CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL
APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 10311 of 2026.
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
NABAIL No. 10314 of 2026
3
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 Abhishek 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
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
Checking your session…