Jay Pal Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

Jay Pal Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted on the ground of parity; accused-applicant Jay Pal to be released forthwith in Case Crime No.07 of 2023 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, subject to seven enumerated conditions.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Jay Pal, arraigned in Case Crime No.07 of 2023 (Police Station Khajuriya, District Rampur) registered under Sections 504, 379, 411 IPC, Section 2/3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Section 16 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail, particularly on the ground of parity with co-accused Vijay Pal and Satpal who had already been granted anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

This Court, considering the facts and circumstances and in light of its own judgment in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha and the Supreme Court judgments in Paras Ram Vishnoi and Satender Kumar Antil, held that the applicant had made out a case for anticipatory bail and allowed the application on the ground of parity with co-accused Vijay Pal and Satpal.

Ratio / Principle

The accused-applicant Jay Pal was ordered to be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime 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.

Key takeaways

The grant of anticipatory bail was made subject to seven enumerated conditions, including availability for police interrogation as and when required, abstention from inducement/threat/promise or tampering with evidence, no departure from India without prior permission of the court, no pressurising of prosecution witnesses, appearance before the trial court on each fixed date unless exempted, and liberty to the court concerned to cancel bail on breach of any condition.ratio¶16
It was made clear that the observations made in the order are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.obiter¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — Section 438 Cr.P.C. — Grant on ground of parity. Single-judge order of the Allahabad High Court (Justice Krishan Pahal, Court No. 65, dated 27.1.2025) granting anticipatory bail to applicant Jay Pal sought in Case Crime No.07 of 2023, Police Station Khajuriya, District Rampur, registered under Sections 504, 379, 411 IPC, Section 2/3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Section 16 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. Parity established with co-accused VijayPal and SatPal, who had already been granted anticipatory bail by the same Court vide order dated 18.04.2024 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.3818 of 2024; the A.G.A. disputed the prayer but did not contest the parity aspect. Applicant's criminal history of one case stood explained by a filed closure report. Relying on Nanha s/o Nabhan Kha v. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 (this Court), Paras Ram Vishnoi v. Director, CBI, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 (SC) and Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (SC), and citing Prabhakar Tewari v. State of U.P., 2020 (11) SCC 648 (pendency of criminal cases alone no ground to refuse bail), the Court held a case for anticipatory bail was made out and released the applicant till conclusion of trial on a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to standard conditions (availability for interrogation; no inducement/tampering; no travel abroad without permission; attendance on each date; cancellation on breach). Observations confined to the bail application and not to affect the trial.