Mewalal Maurya and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9373 of 2025

¶3

Mewalal Maurya And Another

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Gupta, Rakesh Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 72

¶7

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶8

Shri R.C. Dwivedi, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the first informant, which is taken on record.

¶9

Heard Shri Rakesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri R.C. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the first informant, Shri O.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶10

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime / FIR no.91 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 380, 120-B, 406, 504, 506 of IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Maharajganj, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶11

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the applicants was granted interim protection from arrest during investigation by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.05.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.8215 of 2023. It is further submitted that the charge sheet in this case has already been submitted and the applicant is ready and willing to cooperate in the trial. It is also submitted that the applicants are having no criminal history. It was also submitted that applicants undertake to co-operate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶12

NABAIL No. 9373 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

Learned counsel for the first informant has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and it has been submitted by him that the applicants has filed an application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the order of taking cognizance and the charge sheet, which has not been disclosed by the applicants in the memo of application. It is further submitted that the applicants siphoned off the fees received from the students and thereby they have committed a serious offence and now the charge sheet has been filed, which means the allegations are prima facie true. It is further submitted that the applicants are not cooperating in the trial.

¶15

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has also opposed the application for anticipatory bail and it has been submitted by him that the applicants are not cooperating in the trial.

¶16

In reply, learned counsel for the applicants submits that several cases are going on between the applicants and the first informant and the dispute relates to the management committee. It is further submitted that the applicant no.1 is the Principal of Maharana Pratap Inter College, Maharajganj and applicant no.2 is a clerk of the said college.

¶17

Applicants were granted interim protection from arrest during investigation by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.05.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.8215 of 2023. It is further submitted that the charge sheet in this case has already been submitted and the applicant is ready and willing to cooperate in the trial. It is also submitted that the applicants are having no criminal history.

¶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, 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, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶20

NABAIL No. 9373 of 2025

¶21

3

¶22

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶23

In the event of arrest of the applicants - Mewalal Maurya and Vikram Prasad involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on their 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 :-

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶27

(iv) The applicants 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 applicants.

¶29

December 2, 2025 RKM

¶30

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶31

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

Mewalal Maurya and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mewalal Maurya and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Similar cases

Lalbabu Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Suresh @ Suresh Chandra and Another vs State of U.P.

Hooblal vs State of U.P.

Rajeev Alias Raju and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Shammu Pahalwan vs State of U.P.

Shiv Kumar Chauhan and Another vs State of U.P. and Another