Allowed

Munchun Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2025BAIL/4943/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application under BNS provisions relating to recovery of seven motorcycles from eight accused. Court noted parity with bailed co-accused, applicant's custody since December 2024, and allowed bail with conditions against tampering, adjournments and criminal activity.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in like amount, subject to conditions; sureties to be verified.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:47752

¶2

Court No. - 67

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4943 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Munchun Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raghvendra Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit, filed today, is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.654 of 2024, under Sections 303(2), 317(4), 317(5), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 317(2), 112(2) B.N.S., P.S. Kotwali, District Azamgarh, during pendency of the trial.

¶9

As per F.I.R. allegation, seven motorcycles have been recovered from the possession of eight accused persons including applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. After arrest, th applicant has been implicated in five other cases. The alleged recovery is false, planted and not supported by any independent witness. The applicant has criminal history which is explained in Para-16 of the affidavit of bail application. It is next submitted that co-accused, namely, Sanjay Gupta and Ankit Yadav have been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 23.01.2025 and 10.03.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.2278 of 2025 and 8406 of 2025, respectively, hence the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. Moreover, there is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.12.2024 and in case, he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate in trial.

¶10

On the other hand, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶11

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and 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 bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant, Munchun Chauhan be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶15

(ii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 4.4.2025 Meenu Singh

¶18

Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Munchun Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munchun Chauhan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dilshad Alias Dilshan vs State of U.P.

Rishi vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Arif vs State of U.P.

Babar Khan vs State of U.P.

Vijay Kumar vs State of U.P.

Varun Kumar vs State of U.P.