HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7796 of 2025 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record. This Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 482 BNSS has been moved by the applicant after rejecting his anticipatory bail application by the order dated 01.09.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Chandauli, seeking Anticipatory Bail in Case Crime No. 100 of 2025, under Sections 108 BNS and Section 67 IT Act, police station Dhanapur, district Chandauli, during the pendency of the investigation. As per prosecution case, in brief, complainant got an F.I.R. lodged on 28.07.2025 against Khushbu, Vijay and Manish Sharma stating inter alia that accused persons sent the nude photographs of his wife Sona Devi on his mobile phone and being ashamed of this act, his wife has committed suicide on 28.07.2025 at about 1 O'clock in the night. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Obscene/nude photographs of the deceased Sona Devi was sent by his sister Khushbu from her mobile phone on the mobile phone of husband of the deceased. The applicant did not send obscene photographs of the deceased on the mobile phone of husband of the deceased as alleged by the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mahesh Prasad Yadav, Sudhakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vinay Kumar Sharma .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) prosecution. Incident took place on 28.07.2025 at 01:00 A.M. but F.I.R. was lodged after a delay of 13 hours. Mobile phone of the applicant was also not collected by the Investigating Officer for investigation. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant has apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, applicant is released on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate with the investigation. Learned Additional Government Advocate, who has accepted notice of this case on behalf of State of U.P. has opposed the prayer for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant by contending that all the accused persons namely, Khushbu, Vinay and Manish had sent obscene video and photographs of the deceased on the mobile phone of her husband. When she came to know about her photographs, she being ashamed committed suicide. It is next submitted that mobile phone of all the accused persons have been collected by the Investigating Officer and the same has been sent to forensic science laboratory for its examination. It is also pointed out that obscene video/photographs of the deceased was not sent only on the mobile phone of her husband but it was also sent to other persons, namely, Chandan, Sunil and Devesh Kumar who in their statements have also accepted the said fact, which shows the bad intention of the accused persons. Investigation of this case is still pending. Lastly, it is submitted that this anticipatory bail application is liable to be rejected. Object of Section 482 of B.N.S.S. 2023 is that a person should not be unnecessarily harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy personal vendetta or grudge of complainant or any other person operating the things directly or from behind the curtains. It is well settled that discretionary power conferred by the legislature on this Court cannot be put in a straitjacket formula, but such discretionary power either grant or refusal of anticipatory bail has to be exercised carefully in appropriate cases with circumspection on the basis of the available material after evaluating the facts of the particular case and considering other relevant factors (nature and gravity of accusation, role attributed to accused, conduct of accused, criminal antecedents, NABAIL No. 7796 of 2025 2 possibility of the applicant to flee from Justice, apprehension of tampering of the witnesses or threat to the complainant, impact of grant of anticipatory bail in investigation or society, etc.) with meticulous precision maintaining balance between the conflicting interest, namely, sanctity of individual liberty and interest of society. In the light of above, looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties as mentioned above, taking into consideration the role assigned to the applicant as per prosecution case, gravity and nature of accusation, this court is of the view that no case for exercising its discretionary power under Section 482 BNSS is made out in favour of applicant. Accordingly this application under Section 482 BNSS is rejected. It is clarified that anything said in this order at this stage is limited to the purpose of determination of this anticipatory bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. October 7, 2025 Shubham NABAIL No. 7796 of 2025 3 (Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad