Dismissed

Bhaji Om and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC2 Jun 2021ABAIL/10379/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge court rejected an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. where the applicants were accused of culpable homicide related to fatal injuries sustained by the informant's father, holding no case for discretionary bail. The court noted the appellants alleged false implication.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is rejected.

Bhaji Om and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 42

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10379 of 2021 Applicant :- Bhaji Om And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Somdev Dixit,Arvind Kumar Dixit,Pankaj Sharma

¶3

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Pankaj Sharma and Sri Arvind Kumar Dixit, learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicants seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 151 of 2021, under Sections 307/323/504/506/427 IPC, Police Station Khair, District Aligarh, during the pendency of the investigation.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants are innocent and falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that present FIR is nothing but counterblast of the FIR lodged by the applicnts against opposite party no. 2. Lastly, it is submitted that applicants have apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, applicant is released on anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the investigation.

¶8

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for granting anticipatory bail to the applicants by contending that the allegations levelled against the applicants are serious in nature. He further submits that the father of the informant has received fatal injuries in his head and, as such, present anticipatory bail application is liable to be rejected by this Court.

¶9

In the light of above, looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties as mentioned above, taking into consideration the role assigned to the applicants as per prosecution case, gravity and nature of accusation, as well as the father of the informant has received fatal injuries in his head, this Court is of the view that no case for exercising its discretionary power under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is made out in favour of applicant.

¶10

Accordingly, this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is rejected.

¶11

Order Date :- 2.6.2021 Shekhar

¶12

Digitally signed by Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal Date: 2021.06.02 13:47:26 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bhaji Om and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhaji Om and 2 Others 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dilshad and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shahjad and 7 Other Vs State of U.P.

Sahil Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gulsadiq Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bilal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suka @ Kamal Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another