Single judge allowed anticipatory bail to Mukta Prasad in a criminal case involving abduction and kidnapping under IPC 363 and 366, applying Supreme Court precedent.
Anticipatory bail granted till conclusion of trial on furnishing personal and two sureties with conditions of appearance and non-interference.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:224275
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13068 of 2023 Applicant :- Mukta Prasad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). that 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 28.11.2023 Ravi Kant
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant, Mukta Prasad, should be granted anticipatory bail in the pending criminal proceedings under Sections 363 and 366 IPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)Applied¶13
Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Mukta Prasad
State of U.P.
Krishan Pahal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
