APHC010003512025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3327] FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO.72 OF 2025 Between: Mukesh Jain ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. SODUM ANVESHA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following ORDER: This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the petitioner/Accused, seeking anticipatory bail, in connection with Crime No.404 of 2024 of Bommuru Police Station, East Godavari district. 2 2. A case has been registered against the petitioner herein for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 376(2)(f), 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the de facto complainant/victim has two sons and due to disputes she got separated from her husband 10 years ago and has been working as security guard in AP Paper Limited, Kadiyam Unit since 2021. The petitioner/accused, who is the Executive Director, through the Deputy General Manager (IR) of the said Company, called her to his room in the last week of August, 2023 and by exchanging phone numbers started chatting with her. It is alleged that on 21.10.2023, at about 09.30 pm, the petitioner/accused went to her house and taking advantage of her situation, promising to provide permanent job to her and her son in the paper mill, despite her objection, forcibly enjoyed her sexually. Again on 29.06.2024, he came to her house and forcibly cohabitated against her will. Ultimately, cheated her without providing job either to her or to her son and threatened her with dire consequences. 3 4. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, Sri Singamsetty V.M. Sankar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the de facto complainant, across the Bench, has submitted that the de facto complainant is not interested in prosecuting the present case. He submitted that the de facto complainant is also present in the Court Hall. 5. Even when this Court also enquired with the de facto complainant, who is present in the Court, as to whether she is interested in prosecuting the matter or not, she categorically stated that she is not interested in prosecuting the matter. 6. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner herein/Accused on the following conditions. i) In the event of arrest of the petitioner herein/Accused in the aforesaid crime, he shall be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of the like sum each to the satisfaction of the concerned Arresting Officer. ii) Petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required, and he shall not, 4 directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed. _______________________ K. SREENIVASA REDDY, J Dated:10.01.2025 Note: Issue CC today (B/O) Nsr 5 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY Criminal Petition No.72 of 2025 Dated:10.01.2025 Nsr