Samit Gopal,J.

1. Heard Sri Deepak Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Mishra, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Pinky, seeking anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest in Case Crime No. 1150 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 354B, 323, 504 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District Bulandshahar, during pendency of trial/investigation.

3. Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P. This anticipatory bail application is thus being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant states that the prayer in the present anticipatory bail application be confined only during the pendency of investigation/submission of police report and he presses the same only.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is unmarried Nanad of the first informant/victim, para 21 has been placed before the Court. The FIR has been lodged after four months of the incident. There was matrimonial discord between Amit, the husband of the first informant and her which is going on. The allegation in the F.I.R. with regard to enraging modesty of the victim is a vague allegation. It is further argued that entire family of the applicant has been implicated with malafide intentions. Even the husband of the first informant has moved an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. It is further argued that Amit, the husband of the first informant has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 12.4.2022 by co- ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.2825 of 2022. It is further argued that Sumit, the Devar of the first informant has also been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 20.4.2022 by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.2993 of 2022. Co-accused Mukesh Agarwal, fatherin-law of the victim has also been granted anticipatory bail application by this Court vide order dated 19.4.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.2957 of 2022 and order dated 22.4.2022 passed in the correction application. Copies of the said orders have been produced before the Court which are taken on record. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 24 of the affidavit in support of anticipatory bail application.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the F.I.R. of the present case has been lodged after four months of the incident. Matrimonial dispute between Amit, the husband of the first informant and her is going on. The husband, father-in-law and devar of the first informant/victim have been granted anticipatory bail.

8. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

9. In the event of arrest of the applicant, Pinky involved in aforesaid case, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police office 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 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 she has passport the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

10. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

11. The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

12. The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

13. The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed.