ASHOK KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 8912 of 2026

Ashok Kumar
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)                        :    Bindu Kumari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                   :    G.A.

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

1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant; and Learned A.G.A. for the
State.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicant in Session Case No.527 of 2026 (State vs. Bindu and others)
arising out of Case Crime No. 177 of 2026, under Sections 137(2),
143(4), 61(2), 64(2)(m), and 99 of the B.N.S., 2023, and Sections 16/17
of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station –
Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra, with a prayer to enlarge him on
anticipatory bail, as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the aforesaid
case.

3. The Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the F.I.R. was
lodged under some misunderstanding. The co-accused Shiv Singh alias
Ramlal, Bindu, Rahul Kumar and Soni have been granted regular bail by
this Court in Bail Application No. 21492 of 2026, 21900 of 2026, 24326
of 2026 and 21127 of 2026. The Learned counsel has contended that the
accused Rahul Kumar and the victim have married and are both living as
husband and wife. This fact has been considered by the High Court while
granting bail to the co-accused in paragraph no. 9. The applicant has a
criminal history of one other case but he is not a previous convict.

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute
the fact that the co-accused Rahul Kumar and the victim have married and
are living as husband and wife.
                                                      NABAIL No. 8912 of 2026
                               2


5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
parties.

6. The applicant is not a previous convict and has a criminal history of
only one other case. In the prima facie opinion of the Court, there is least
likelihood of the applicant repeating the offence. In the order passed in
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 21127 of 2026 and other connected
bail applications, this Court in paragraph no. 9, recorded the contention of
the Learned counsel for the informant as under:

     "Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant did not
     oppose the bail application of Rahul Kumar as he has married
     the victim and both of them are living as husband and wife."

Even today, despite service of notice on 26.08.2026, no one has appeared
to oppose this application.

7. In the facts and circumstances of the case especially taking note of the
fact that the victim and the primary accused Rahul Kumar are stated to
have married with each other and are residing as husband and wife, I
deem it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

8. The anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.

9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant- Ashok Kumar, involved in
the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail, on his
furnishing a personal bond and surety 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. 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. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of
the Court;

iv. The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;
                                                                                       NABAIL No. 8912 of 2026
                                                                  3

                                    10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
                                    shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

                                    11. 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.)
                                    September 9, 2026
                                    Kushal




Digitally signed by :-
KUSHAL AGRAWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad