Dismissed

Puran and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Dec 2020ABAIL/3568/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge considered an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. While noting prima facie evidence of offences including murder, the court rejected blanket bail but directed surrender within 60 days considering the settled law of Amrawati and Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; applicants directed to surrender within 60 days; coercive action directed if they fail to appear.

Puran and Another Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3568 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Puran And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhiraj Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Devendra Saini

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Order on Criminal Misc. Exemption Application

¶6

This exemption application is allowed.

¶7

Order on Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicants; Sri Devendra Saini, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶9

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Puran and Ghasitu, with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 95 of 2020, under Sections- 147, 148, 323, 325 and 307 IPC, Police StationFatehpur, District- Saharanpur, during pendency of trial.

¶10

The implication of the applicant is under Section 302 IPC. No interference is called for.

¶11

After considering the rival submissions this court finds that the applicants are not entitled to be granted anticipatory bail. The offences alleged are prima facie made out from the allegations in the FIR.

¶12

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicants appears and surrenders before the court below within 60 days from today and applies for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided as per the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.

¶13

Till then no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

¶14

However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶15

It is made clear that the applicants will not be granted any further time by this court for surrendering before the court below as directed above.

¶16

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of .

¶17

Order Date :- 16.12.2020 Rohit

¶18

Digitally signed by JUSTICE SIDDHARTH Date: 2020.12.16 18:51:19 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Puran and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Puran and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rauf Haji @ Mohd. Raoof Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Reeta Balwani Vs State of U.P.

Raj Bahadur and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravi Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Suleman Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Kumar Vs State of U.P.