Jony Alias Deepak Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 6267 of 2025

Jony Alias Deepak .....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anand Prakash Dubey, Prashant Kumar Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No.- 72

¶4

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri A.P. Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri A.K. Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 23 of 2025 under sections 352, 351 (2), 75 (2) of B.N.S. and 11 (4)/12 POCSO Act, Police Station Chhaprauli, District Baghpat with the prayer that in the event of arrest, the applicant may be released on bail.

¶8

At the very outset, l,earned AGA submits that notice has been served upon the first informant.

¶9

It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and no offence under sections 352, 351 (2) of B.N.S. is made out against him. It is further submitted that as per the FIR, there is allegation against the applicant that he caught hold of the hand of the victim and tried to outrage her modesty. He further submits that the victim in her statement recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS has stated that the applicant had caught hold of her hand and tried to outrage her modesty. It is also submitted that now compromise has taken place between the parties. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when

¶10

NABAIL No. 6267 of 2025

¶11

2

¶12

required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶13

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail.

¶14

I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

¶15

As per the FIR, allegation against the applicant is that he caught hold of the hand of the victim and tried to outrage her modesty. It is submitted that the parties have now entered into compromise.

¶16

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, the Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedents of the accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate the entire available material against the accused carefully and the exact role of accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶17

In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶18

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶19

In the event of arrest of the applicant Jony @ Deepak involved in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his 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 :-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court

¶21

NABAIL No. 6267 of 2025

¶22

3

¶23

concerned;

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

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 applicant.

¶28

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶29

October 8, 2025 Madhurima

¶30

Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jony Alias Deepak v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jony Alias Deepak v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases