Anand Pal Vs State of U.P.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7639 of 2025

¶3

Anand Pal

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gajendra Kumar Gautam Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 72

¶7

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶8

Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant today is taken on record.

¶9

Heard Sri Gajendra Kumar Gautam learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shiv Dutt Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶10

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0546 of 2024 under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station Nai Mandi, District Muzaffar Nagar with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶11

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the abovementioned case. He further submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the matter relates to some commercial transaction which has been given colour of criminality. It is submitted that no offence under Sections 318(4) and 316(2) BNS is made out against the applicant. It is further submitted that monetary transaction took place in the account of the wife of the first informant. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the

¶12

NABAIL No. 7639 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶15

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail, however, he does not dispute the factual aspect.

¶16

I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

¶17

As per first information report, the allegation against the applicant is that the applicant along with co-accused indulged in some manipulation in the quotation supplied by the company in connivance with the Bank authorities. The transaction of money is said to have taken place in the account of the wife of the first informant.

¶18

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra , (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, the Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶19

In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶20

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶21

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Anand Pal involved in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions :-

¶22

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned;

¶23

NABAIL No. 7639 of 2025

¶24

3

¶25

(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/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶26

(iii) The applicant would cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶27

(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned.

¶28

In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant herein.

¶29

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶30

October 8, 2025

¶31

Abhishek

¶32

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anand Pal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Pal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases