SACHIN GOSWAMIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

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

Sachin Goswami
                                                            .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus

State of U.P. and Another
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Jitendra Kumar Singh, Uttar Kumar
                                Goswami
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 70
                 HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned A.G.A.
for the State and perused the record.

2. This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant seeking
anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 885 of 2025 under Sections 69, 352,
351(3) BNS, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Banda.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis
of false and fabricated allegations. It is further contended that the present
FIR has been lodged against the applicant alleging that he established
physical relationship with the victim under the pretext of marriage.
Learned counsel further submits that earlier also, the victim of the present
case had lodged a similar FIR against another person, pursuant to which
the said accused was sent to jail; however, subsequently, the victim filed
an affidavit stating that the complaint had been lodged under pressure
from her parents. It is next submitted that victim is a greedy, fraudulent
and cunning lady and she used to cheat innocent persons by cooking up
fake story and by registering criminal cases against them, she used to
illegally demand money. It is further submitted that the FIR does not
disclose the specific date, time, or place of the alleged incident, and there
is neither any medical evidence nor any independent witness to
corroborate the prosecution version. It is next submitted that applicant is
                                                         NABAIL No. 524 of 2026
                                 2


having apprehension of arrest by the police any time in the above-
mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. If the
applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty and will
cooperate with the trial.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the anticipatory bail.

5. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another,
(2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the law on the subject
finally by holding that the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration
invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

6. It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can,
depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after
filing of the charge sheet till trial.

7. It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while
considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to
consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of
his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence
including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as
leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be
generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the
offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case,
while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether
to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

8. Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail,
nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and
circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits
of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant
till the trial.

9. The application is allowed accordingly.

10. In the event of arrest of the applicant-Sachin Goswami, he shall be
released on anticipatory bail till the end of trial on furnishing a personal
bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the
                                                                                          NABAIL No. 524 of 2026
                                                                   3


                                    satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-

                                    (i) The applicant shall make himself/herself available before the
                                    Investigating Officer/Court concerned on the date fixed in the matter and
                                    will cooperate in the investigation/trial.

                                    (ii) 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 office.

                                    (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of
                                    the Court and if he/she has passport, the same shall be deposited by
                                    him/her before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

                                    11. In case of default of any of the conditions, the same may be a ground
                                    for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant.



                                                                                       (Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
                                    May 6, 2026
                                    KK Patel




Digitally signed by :-
KRISHN KANT PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad