HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4354 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. This case is taken up on a mention. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant today is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Ashutosh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manoj Gautam, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 4. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 16 of 2019, under Sections 386, 420, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Mugalsarai, District Chandauli with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 5. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above- mentioned case. He further submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated as no offence under Section 386 IPC against him is made out. It is further submitted that there is no evidence regarding making the data viral in various what's app group. It is submitted that the applicant is having criminal history, which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit. It is also submitted that chargesheet has already been submitted in the present case. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co- operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashutosh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mukesh Kumar Tiwari .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, 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. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and submitted that Rs. 30,000/- has been demanded by the applicant for deleting the data, which was made viral by the applicant. 7. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 8. As per the allegation in the first information report, allegation against the applicant is that he got transferred the data of mobile phone of the first informant to his mobile phone fraudulently and made the same viral in various what's app group. The applicant is said to have demanded Rs. 30,000/- for deleting the data from his mobile phone. There is no evidence regarding the data being made viral in various what's app group and there is no evidence whether any amount is paid by the first informant to the applicant. The applicant is having criminal history which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit. 9. 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, 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. 10. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the 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. 11. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 12. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Mukesh Kumar Tiwari involved NABAIL No. 4354 of 2025 2 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 :- (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 concerned; (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; (iii) The applicant would cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 13. 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 herein. October 15, 2025 Abhishek NABAIL No. 4354 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad