Application for anticipatory bail rejected by the High Court due to lack of foundational evidence regarding apprehension of arrest, noting the FIR was registered in 2018.
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. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 197 of 2020
Applicant :- Anis Ahmad @ Anis Miyan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rizwan Ahamad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashutosh Pandey, the learned Brief Holder for the State and perused the record.
The instant application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in light of the apprehension of the arrest of the applicant in Case Crime No. 1324 of 2018, under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, police station Baradari, District Bareilly.
Presently the Court notes that no foundation has been laid in respect of apprehension of arrest. This more so in light of the fact that the FIR itself was registered in 2018. Consequently, this application is rejected at this stage.
Order Date :- 7.1.2020 Vivek Kr.
Anis Ahmad
Yashwant Varma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
