Monish and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another
Case brief
What is this about?
The Court rejected the anticipatory bail application due to the lack of foundation for special circumstances, though it noted the jurisdiction remains with the Sessions Judge under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
What the court decided
Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 353 of 2020
Applicant :- Monish And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Vikas Sahai, the 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.446 of 2019 under Sections 147, 149, 307, 323, 336, 504, 506 IPC, police station Mandi Dhanaura, District J.P. Nagar (Amroha).
There is no foundation laid in respect of special circumstances. Consequently 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 Vivek Kr.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when no foundation is laid for special circumstances.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Monish and 4 Others
Coram
Yashwant Varma
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · January
- Registered
- Case no.
- ABAIL/353/2020
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court