JUDGMENT

Krishan Pahal, J.

Heard Sri Zafar Abbas and Sushil Kumar Tewari, learned counsels for the applicant and Sri Deepak Kumar Srivastava and Sri Mukesh Joshi, learned counsels for the informant as well as Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 1277 of 2020, under Sections 354 , 354B, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Majhola, District Moradabad, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

Prosecution Story:

3. As per prosecution story, on 07.10.2020 at about 5.30 pm, the daughter of the informant had gone to see the water in the overhead tank of the house. Seeing her alone, the applicant Alok Kumar Mishra is stated to have outraged her modesty. On hearing her shrieks, the informant and her son came to the scene of occurrence. On seeing them, the applicant is stated to have called his wife and a friend at the scene of occurrence, and assaulted the informant and her son Prakhar Gupta. The applicant is stated to have also outraged the modesty of the informant and torn her clothes. The said incident has been video-recorded in the CCTV camera and the mobile.

Arguments for the Applicant:

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has further stated that the FIR is delayed by about eleven days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant has genuine apprehension of arrest, as the police is continuously raiding his house. It is also stated by learned counsel that prior to the present anticipatory bail application, the applicant had also filed an Criminal Misc Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 CR.P.C. No. 1018 of 2021 and he was granted anticipatory bail till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. vide order dated 19.2.2021.

5. Learned counsel has further stated that after the filing of the final report (charge sheet) by the investigating officer, the applicant filed another Criminal Misc Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 CR.P.C. No. 4588 of 2022 and the applicant was granted fifteen days' time to get the non-bailable warrants issued against him cancelled vide order dated 13.6.2022 and the anticipatory bail application was disposed of. Learned counsel has stated that the non-bailable warrants issued against the applicant were cancelled by the C.J.M. Moradabad vide order dated 17.6.2022. Thereupon, the applicant moved the third anticipatory bail application No. 5746 of 2022, which was also finally disposed of by this Court vide order dated 1.7.2022 thereby granting fifteen days' time to the applicant to appear before the trial court and it was directed that the bail application of the applicant shall be considered and decided in view of the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another 2022 SCC Online SC 825 and Puran Singh and others v. State of U.P. and others 2016 (95) ACC 950 vide order dated 1.7.2022.

6. In compliance of the order dated 1.7.2022 the applicant moved an application for regular bail as well as for interim bail before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, Moradabad, on 12.7.2022. Learned A.C.J.M. had declined to hear the regular bail application of the applicant without taking the applicant into custody vide order dated 14.7.2020 and ha