Allowed

Korrapolu Joy Jamima v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC9 Jul 2025CRLP/3538/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused in a honey-trap blackmail case sought regular bail after over 270 days in judicial custody. Investigation largely complete with a preliminary charge sheet filed. Considering the offences' nature, detention length and her being a woman, the court granted bail on conditions including personal bond, periodic police appearance and no tampering.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on personal bond of Rs.25,000 with two like sureties, subject to conditions of alternate-day police reporting till charge sheet, cooperation with investigation and no induc

Korrapolu Joy Jamima Vs the State of Andhra… — Cheating and Forgery | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

¶1

[3327]

¶2

APHC010160652025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3608/2025

¶8

Between:

¶9

KORRAPOLU JOY JAMIMA,, D/O JAYDEV, AGE 27 YEARS, CHRISTIAN, R/O D.NO 37-2-67/2 PLOT NO. 108, SURAJ KUNJ SUSEELA SADAN, NGO'S COLONY, MURALI NAGAR, MADHAVDHARA, KANCHARAPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM CITY. ANDHRA PRADESH-530004.

¶10

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Through Station House Officer, Kancharapalem Police Station, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶13

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶14

Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to release the petitioner on Bail in connection with Crime No.359/2024 of Airport Police Station, Visakhapatnam District

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

¶16

1.Isukapatla.Ajay Krishna

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶18

SRK, J Crl.P.No.3608 of 2025

¶19

¶20

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶21

This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023, has been filed by the petitioner/A-1, seeking regular bail in Crime No.359 of 2024 of Airport Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate.

¶22

A case has been registered against the petitioner herein and others for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 386, 307, 347, 328, 352, 506 read with 34 IPC and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000-2008.

¶23

This is a case of Honey Trap occurred prior to 27.04.2023 at Murali Nagar, Madhavadhara, Visakhapatnam. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that A1 allegedly used to entice men and sedate them and exploit them with intimate photos and blackmail them for money. The allegations are that acquaintance developed between the de facto complainant and the petitioner herein/A1 since January 2022 and thereafter, A1 exploited the de facto complainant with intimate photos and blackmailed him for money and threatened him with dire consequences.

¶24

SRK, J Crl.P.No.3608 of 2025

¶25

¶26

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/A-1

¶27

submits that earlier a case has been registered against the petitioner/A1 in Crime No.413 of 2024 of Bheemunipatnam Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate, under Sections 318(4), 308(2), 127(2), 123, 131, 351(2), 109, 61(2) of the BNS and Section 67-A of the Information Technology Act, 2000-2008, and this Court, vide orders dated 09.12.2024, passed in Criminal Petition No.8542 of 2024, granted bail to her. Thereafter, on execution of PT Warrant, the petitioner herein/A1 was arrested in the present crime on 21.10.2024 and remanded to judicial custody. Since then she has been in jail for more than 270 days.

¶28

On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that in the present crime the investigation has been completed and the police have filed preliminary charge sheet. He further submits that the main charge sheet has to be filed.

¶29

Heard. Perused the record.

¶30

A perusal of the material on record goes to show that the petitioner herein/A1 was released on bail in other similar crime. Thereafter, she was produced on PT warrant and remanded to judicial custody on 21.10.2024. Since then, she is languishing in

¶31

SRK, J Crl.P.No.3608 of 2025

¶32

¶33

jail for more than 270 days. Major portion of investigation has been completed and the police have filed preliminary charge sheet and they have to file main charge sheet.

¶34

Considering the nature of the offences alleged, length of detention and the fact that the petitioner is a woman and also based on the principle laid down that “Bail is the rule and jail is an exception”, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner herein/A1, on the following conditions.

¶35

i) The petitioner/A-1 shall be released on bail on her executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties of the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Mahila Court Judge, at Visakhapatnam.

¶36

ii) On such release, the petitioner/A1 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned on every alternate day between 10.00 AM and 5.00 PM till filing of the charge sheet.

¶37

iii) The petitioner shall make herself available for investigation as and when required and she shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any persons acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.

¶38

SRK, J Crl.P.No.3608 of 2025

¶39

¶40

iv) The petitioner shall not indulge in similar acts of crime.

¶41

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶42

_______________________ K. SREENIVASA REDDY, J

¶43

Dated:10.07.2025 Nsr

¶44

SRK, J Crl.P.No.3608 of 2025

¶45

¶46

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY

¶47

Criminal Petition No.3608 of 2025

¶48

Dated:10.07.2025

¶49

Nsr

Korrapolu Joy Jamima v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Korrapolu Joy Jamima v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B. Satyanarayana Vs State of A.P.

Tallapalli Maheswara Reddy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Lepakshi Baba Fakruddin Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Korrapolu Joy Jamima, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Meda Nagaiah, Vs Palaparthi Subba Rao

The State of a.P., Vs Annamdasu Srinivasa Rao