1. Heard Sri Kapil Misra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. through video conferencing in view of COVID-19 pandemic.
2. The present second anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in pursuance to the First Information Report registered as Case Crime No.257 of 2019, under Section 354, 506 of IPC and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, Police Station Itaunja, District Lukcnow.
3. According to the first information report lodged on 20.08.2019 prosecutrix, who was a minor student has accused the applicant, who is math teacher of the said school, for the offences under Section 7/8 of POCSO Act stating that applicant had molested her at the school. During investigation the prosecutrix has duly given statement under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she has reiterated the contents of the First Information Report and also clearly supported the allegation in detail under the POCSO Act against the applicant. Now the charge sheet has been filed and the investigation is over.
4. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that this Court on earlier occasion in an Anticipatory Bail No. 9447 of 2019 (Vikas Shukla Vs. State of U.P.), was granted protection to the applicant till filing of the charge sheet. The present application has been filed because charge sheet has been filed and protection granted to the applicant earlier by this Court is exhausted itself.
5. Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and, keeping in mind the allegation levelled against him as have emerged during investigation as the statement of prosecutrix, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I do not find it to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail.
7. The instant second anticipatory bail application is rejected.
8. The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by him alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
9. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 7.5.2021 Mohit