Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant.

2. Mr. Pushpa Bhatt, learned Addl. Advocate General along with Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. By means of the present anticipatory bail application, the applicant seeks grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 54 of 2026 dated 06.05.2026, registered under Sections 115, 351(2), 74 and 78(1) of the B.N.S. at Police Station Mukhani, District Nainital.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged alleging, inter alia, that the complainant was acquainted with the applicant for approximately two years and both were in a love relationship and owing to certain conduct of the applicant, the complainant had asked him to maintain distance from her. It is further alleged that on 04.05.2026, the applicant came to the residence of the complainant, subjected her to molestation, recorded a video of the incident and threatened to make the same viral.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant would further submit that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case; that, the applicant and the complainant admittedly knew each other for a considerable period and were involved in a consensual relationship; that, the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. are exaggerated and do not reflect the true factual position; that, the relationship between the applicant and the complainant was known to their respective family members; that, the complainant had visited the residence of the applicant on several occasions and had participated in family functions and festivals, including Diwali celebrations at the applicant’s residence.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant would further submit that even on 04.05.2026, the prosecutrix had sent a “good morning” message to the applicant through Instagram, which, according to the applicant, demonstrates that relations between the parties were cordial; that, when the applicant came to know that the complainant was also involved in a relationship with another person, he expressed his intention to disclose such fact to her family members; that, thereafter, on the same day, the complainant along with her brother assaulted the applicant and forcibly took away his mobile phone; that, due to the said incident and the resultant mental distress, the applicant did not return home and remained untraceable for some time; that, the alleged incident of assault upon the applicant was video-recorded by a passerby.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant would further submit that on the next day i.e. 05.05.2026, the father of the applicant lodged a missing report regarding the applicant, wherein allegations were also made against the complainant. It is further submitted that non-bailable warrants have subsequently been issued against the applicant.

8. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the complainant would vehemently oppose the anticipatory bail application and prayed for time to file counter affidavit/objections.

9. In the interest of justice, four weeks’ time is granted to learned State Counsel to file counter affidavit/objections.

10. List thereafter.

11. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the material presently available on record and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court finds it appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant.

12. Accordingly, it is directed that the investigation shall proceed strictly in accordance with law, however, in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on interim anticipatory bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the Inv