Court rejected an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. due to absence of special circumstances, referencing prior precedent.
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. - 343 of 2020
Applicant :- Nadeem And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Nafees Ahmad learned A.G.A. 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 applicants in Case Crime No. 372 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 45224, 332, 333, 353, 342, 307, 323, 504, 506, 34, 225 IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, police station Puramufti, District Kaushambi.
In the absence of any foundation laid in respect of special circumstances and bearing in mind the decision of the Court rendered in Vinod Kumar Vs. State of U.P. And Another [2019 (12) ADJ 495], this application is rejected . This order however shall not preclude the applicants from invoking the jurisdiction of the concerned Sessions Judge under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Order Date :- 9.1.2020 faraz
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants apprehending arrest in the pending case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vinod Kumar Vs. State of U.P. And Another [2019 (12) ADJ 495]Referred¶7
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nadeem And 3 Others
Yashwant Varma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Yashwant Varma
Parties & counsel
