Allowed

Anubhav Mittal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Apr 2025BAIL/10712/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The respondent State opposed bail. The High Court, finding no relevant change in circumstances since a bail order for a similarly placed co-accused, granted bail to the applicant citing parity and listed specific conditions for appearance and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each, subject to conditions regarding appearance and conduct.

Anubhav Mittal vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:57332

¶2

Court No. - 47

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10712 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Anubhav Mittal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Yadav,Virendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

By means of this application, the applicant, Anubhav Mittal, who is involved in Case Crime No.145 of 2017, under Sections 420, 406 IPC and 66 of Information Technology Act, Police Station Medical, District Meerut and is in jail since 18.11.2020, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused, Smt. Ayushi Agrawal, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court by order dated 03.04.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.27330 of 2024. He has further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused, Smt. Ayushi Agrawal, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity and for the reasons given in the order of co-accused.

¶9

The prayer for bail has vehemently been opposed by learned A.G.A.

¶10

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail on the ground of parity.

¶11

In view of the above, let the applicant be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court

¶12

concerned with the following conditions :-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶20

Order Date :- 17.4.2025 Mini

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MINI KANAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anubhav Mittal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anubhav Mittal v. State of U.P.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Gyanesh vs State of U.P.

Zubair vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Farahim Alias Faheem Alias Farahim vs State of U.P.

X Juvenile vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Salman vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Singh vs State of U.P.