Allowed

Chandra Prakash v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Nov 2025NABAIL/8743/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS for a person accused of cheating and forgery, noting the applicant's marginal role and lack of being a beneficiary of the alleged transaction.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties each in like amount subject to standard conditions.

Chandra Prakash vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8743 of 2025

¶3

Versus Chandra Prakash	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Nirbhay Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 72

¶5

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Shri Nirbhay Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Radhey Shyam, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no.23 of 2025, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station Jasrana, District Firozabad, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶9

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the applicant is not the beneficiary of the alleged transaction. It is further submitted that the applicant is the marginal witness of the alleged sale deed. It is also submitted that applicant is having criminal history, which has been explained in supplementary affidavit filed today. 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 investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶10

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for

¶11

NABAIL No. 8743 of 2025

¶12

¶13

anticipatory bail and it has been submitted by him that the applicant is the marginal witness of the alleged sale deed, which has been executed by the co-accused Ajant Singh by impersonated the actual vendor.

¶14

The applicant is not the beneficiary of the alleged transaction. It is further submitted that the applicant is the marginal witness of the alleged sale deed. It is also submitted that applicant is having criminal history, which has been explained in supplementary affidavit filed today.

¶15

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, 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.

¶16

In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, 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.

¶17

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶18

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Chandra Prakash involved in the aforesaid case crime 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 :-

¶19

(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;

¶20

(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;

¶21

NABAIL No. 8743 of 2025

¶22

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶27

November 13, 2025

¶28

RKM

¶29

Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chandra Prakash v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Prakash 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

Similar cases

Mohammad Kasif vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok Kumar Garg vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Kumar Upadhyay vs State of U.P.

Atul and Another vs State of U.P.

Pawan vs State of U.P.

Mahendra and 2 Others vs State of U.P.