The High Court rejected the second anticipatory bail application of Charan Singh, held it to be misconceived due to lack of special circumstances, and dismissed the plea.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 81
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1351 of 2020
Applicant :- Charan Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Lok Nath Shukla,Raj Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vikas Sahai, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant second bail application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in light of the apprehension of the arrest of the applicant in Case Crime No. 378 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Shergarh, DistrictMathura.
The instant second Anticipatory Bail is thoroughly misconceived since yet again no special circumstances have been alluded to.
The application is rejected .
Order Date :- 12.2.2020 Arun K. Singh
(Yashwant Varma, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in the second application for Case Crime No. 378 of 2018.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Charan Singh
Yashwant Varma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
