Dismissed

Hemant @ Santu v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Sept 2020ABAIL/6018/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge rejected the applicant's anticipatory bail application, finding no good ground for bail given the serious accusation of assault and attempted murder despite the applicant's claim of false implication. An exemption from filing the FIR was also granted.

What did the court decide?

Exemption for filing certified copy of FIR allowed; Anticipatory bail application rejected.

Hemant @ Santu Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6018 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Hemant @ Santu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Yogendra Pal Singh,Santosh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Yogendra Pal Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Anjali Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

An exemption application has been filed on behalf of the applicant along with present bail application for exempting the filing of certified copy of the F.I.R. as it could not be made available to the applicant due to COVID19.

¶7

The exemption application is allowed.

¶8

The filing of certified copy of the F.I.R. is hereby exempted.

¶9

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that though the informant has received injuries on his person but as per the x-ray report no bony injury was found. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case just for harassment, hence anticipatory bail may be granted to the applicant.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that as per the F.I.R. the applicant has assaulted the injured with spear.

¶11

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the submission advanced, the nature and gravity of the accusation, I find no good ground for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant Hemant @ Santu involved in Case Crime No. 83 of 2020 under sections 452, 307, 323, 324, 506 I.P.C., police station Hastinapur, District Meerut.

¶12

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected .

¶13

However, the applicant will be at liberty to move regular bail application under section 439 Cr.P.C., if so advised.

¶14

The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked, before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶15

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶16

Order Date :- 18.9.2020 Shiraz

¶17

Digitally signed by Justice Ramesh Sinha Date: 2020.09.18 16:55:56 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hemant @ Santu v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hemant @ Santu v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramgareeb Vs State of U.P.

Krishna Vs State of U.P.

Akshay Vs State of U.P.

Gulam Fareed Vs State of U.P.

Khushal @ Khushahal Vs State of U.P.

Gulfam Vs State of U.P.