Ajay Bhanot, J.

1. Heard Shri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Dharmendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Nafees Ahmad, learned AGA for the State and Shri Babu Lal Ram, learned counsel for the informant.

2. Shri Nafees Ahmad, learned AGA on the basis of instructions submits that the police authorities have only partly complied with the directions issued by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 46998 of 2020 (Junaid Vs State of U.P. and another) reported at 2021 (6) ADJ 511. [LQ/AllHC/2021/689 ;] Notices of the anticipatory bail application have been served upon the victim/her legal guardians as well as C.W.C. However, Form A and Form B have not been provided by the police authorities to the learned Government Advocate as part of the instructions.

3. The Superintendent of Police, Kaushambi to take disciplinary action as per law against defaulting police officials, who have failed to provide the Form A and Form B to the learned Government Advocate and thereby disobeying the directions of this Court in Junaid (supra) and the consequential orders of the Director General of Police, State of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.

4. The C.W.C. district-Kaushambi has failed to sent any instructions. The C.W.C. district-Kaushambi has not complied with the directions issued by this Court in Junaid (supra) and also not implemented the protective provisions of POCSO Act, 2012 read with POCSO Rules, 2020.

5. The applicant has moved the instant anticipatory bail application as he apprehends arrest in Case Crime No.376 of 2021 under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, Police Station-Kokhraj, District-Kaushambi.

6. Shri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Dharmendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. The victim is aged about 19 years of age. Her date of birth as recorded in the school certificate is 01.01.2002. The victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has admitted to intimacy with the applicant. She has further asserted that the two have established physical relations and she wants to marry the applicant. Shri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Dharmendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the applicant is too interested in marrying the victim. Apart from the instant case, the applicant does not have any criminal history. Lastly it is contended by the learned counsel for applicant that the applicant shall not abscond and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.

7. Shri Babu Lal Ram, learned counsel for the informant submits that if the couple is in love and desirous of getting married, the informant fully supports the marriage proposal.

8. Learned AGA as well as Shri Babu Lal Ram, learned counsel for the informant could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. They, however, do not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

9. Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

10. I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

11. In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application is allowed.

12. The applicant-Sandeep Kumar @ Sanjeev Kumar is granted anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.376 of 2021 under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, Police StationKokhraj, District-Kaushambi, till the conclusion of the trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall attend the Court proceedings as and when required.

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise or to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court.

13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of anticipatory bail before this Court.

14. In case any false facts have been stated on behalf of the applicant or material facts have been suppressed, the State or any concerned party may file an application for recall of this order.

15. The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P., who shall ensure the compliance of present order.