Allowed

Mahendra Pal @ Chhunna v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2023ABAIL/695/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to an applicant in a case involving POCSO and IPC offenses. The application was allowed based on parity with a co-accused who had already been granted bail, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to personal bond, two sureties, and specific conditions including availability for interrogation and no tampering with evidence.

Mahendra Pal @ Chhunna Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:180379

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 695 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Mahendra Pal @ Chhunna Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Pati Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Anand Pati Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anith Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 703 of 2020, registered under Sections 363, 366, 376-DA, 506, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 5/6 POCSO Act at Police Station- Mangalpur, District- Kanpur Dehat with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that coaccused person, Smt. Kusumlata @ Lalita has already been granted anticipatory bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.2.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 594 of 2023. Therefore, the present applicant is also entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he will cooperate in the trial failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

¶10

The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Apex

¶12

Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶13

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Mahendra Pal @ Chhunna be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶15

(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;

¶16

(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶17

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶18

(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶19

(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶20

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶21

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.

¶22

Order Date :- 19.9.2023 Vikas

¶23

[Krishan Pahal, J.]

¶24

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mahendra Pal @ Chhunna v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra Pal @ Chhunna v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mehfooj Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Irfan Hussain and 2 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Manjeet Chaturvedi Vs State of U.P.

Avadhesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Pyare Vs State of U.P.