NABAIL/524/2026 of SACHIN GOSWAMI Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 524 of 2026 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jitendra Kumar Singh, Uttar Kumar Goswami Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sachin Goswami .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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 2 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. May 6, 2026 KK Patel NABAIL No. 524 of 2026 3 (Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad