A single judge of the Mainpuri district court in UP dismissed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC. The court refused bail directing the applicant to face the case, as the nature of injuries inflicted on vital parts did not ground the requisite apprehension for anticipatory bail. The application was rejected on 13.10.2020.
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. - 4742 of 2020
Applicant :- Sunil Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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 applicant in Case Crime No. 86 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 307, 323, 504, 506, 188, 269 IPC and Section 3 Epidemic Diseases Act, Police Station Alau, District Mainpuri.
The Court finds no ground to accord the facility of anticipatory bail to the applicant bearing in mind the nature of injuries which are stated to have been inflicted on vital parts. The prayer so made is refused.
The application consequently stands rejected . Order Date :- 13.10.2020 faraz
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted fearing arrest in CPL cases involving injuries to vital parts.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sunil
State of U.P. and Another
Yashwant Varma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
