Smt. Deepa Garg and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

Smt. Deepa Garg and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim anticipatory bail granted till 21.01.2026 to both applicants on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to stated conditions; final consideration deferred - counter affidavit by first informant's counsel permitted and AGA directed to obtain instructions; case listed fresh on 21.01.2026.

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicants (Smt. Deepa Garg and another) in Case Crime No. 425 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 76, 333, 352, 351(3) of B.N.S., Police Station Nai Mandi, District Muzaffarnagar, in the event of arrest.

Court's answer

In the event of arrest of the applicants involved in the said case crime, they shall be released on interim anticipatory bail till 21.01.2026 on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, subject to the conditions that they shall not tamper with evidence and shall appear before the trial Court on dates fixed unless exempted; shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to dissuade any person acquainted with the facts from disclosing them to the Court or police; shall cooperate during trial and not misuse the liberty of bail; and shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned.

Ratio / Principle

In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file an appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail - application u/S 482 BNSS (No. 10465 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Court No. 72, Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J., December 12, 2025) by Smt. Deepa Garg and another in Case Crime No. 425 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 76, 333, 352, 351(3) of B.N.S., Police Station Nai Mandi, District Muzaffarnagar. Applicants urged: FIR lodged after a delay of 7 days; victim's Section 183 BNSS statement showed she was not willing to file the case; injuries simple; contradictions between the FIR version and the victim's statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS. Court, noting the Supreme Court's criteria in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 (nature and gravity of accusation, antecedents, possibility of fleeing justice, careful evaluation of material, exact role of accused), released the applicants on interim anticipatory bail till 21.01.2026 on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, imposing conditions: no tampering with evidence and appearance before trial Court on fixed dates; no inducement, threat or promise to dissuade disclosure; cooperation during trial and no misuse of bail liberty; no departure from India without prior permission. On default of any condition, prosecution free to seek cancellation. First informant's counsel may file counter affidavit; AGA directed to obtain instructions; matter listed fresh for 21.01.2026.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 10465 of 2025

Smt. Deepa Garg And Another

.....Applicant(s)

Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Akbar Shah Alam Khan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 72

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

Shri Dhiraj Kumar Pandey, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the first informant, which is taken on record.

Heard Shri Mohd. Akbar Shah, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Dhiraj Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the first informant, Shri B.P. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no.425 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 76, 333, 352, 351(3) of B.N.S., Police Station Nai Mandi, District Muzaffarnagar, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the first information report has been lodged after a delay of 7 days. It is further submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS has herself stated that she was not willing to file the present case and when the applicant no.1 again humiliated her then she filed the present case. It is further submitted that the injuries are simple in nature and there is contradiction in the version of the first information report as well as in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS. It was also submitted that applicants undertake to co-operate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

On the other hand, learned AGA submits that he has not received

NABAIL No. 10465 of 2025

2

instructions in the matter as yet.

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Smt. Durga Garg and Anuj Garg involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on interim anticipatory bail till 21.01.2026 on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions :-

(i) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence and that they would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned;

(ii) The applicants 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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) The applicants would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

(iv) The applicants shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned.

In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

List this case on 21.01.2026 as fresh.

In the meantime, learned counsel for the first informant may file counter affidavit and learned AGA is also directed to obtain instructions in the matter by the next date.

December 12, 2025 RKM

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad