Anticipatory bail application in a complaint case under section 406 IPC alleging failure to return a Rs. 10 lacs loan. Applicant contends it is a civil dispute. Court issued notice to opposite party no. 2 and granted interim anticipatory bail with conditions till the next hearing date.
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.
Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7863 of 2024
Applicant :- Vikas Mittal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Pratap Singh,Lokendra Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.
(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police office as and when required.
(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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court concerned.
(iv) In the event, the applicant changes residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned/Investigating Officer about new residential address in writing.
K.K. Maurya
Digitally signed by :- KAMLESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant in a complaint case under section 406 IPC alleging a loan of Rs. 10 lacs was not returned, which counsel characterises as a civil dispute.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Vikas Mittal
State of U.P.
Vikram D. Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
4 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
