This is a single bench judgment dismissing an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC. The court found the grounds insufficient and no immediate threat of arrest, reasoning that no extraordinary circumstance exists to justify the relief. Directions were issued for expeditious bail hearing upon surrender.
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. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10397 of 2021
Applicant :- Smt. Geeta And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Yadavendra Dwivedi,Ashish Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicants Smt. Geeta and Smt. Anju Sharma in Case Crime No. 225 of 2021, under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Badaut, District Baghpat.
The FIR version is that the appellants are purchaser of a land reserved for public utility and khaliyan from the seller Ankur Kumar by the order passed by S.D.M., Badaut, who directed the SHO Kotwali for registering the FIR against the involved persons, consequently, the FIR was registered.
Submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are women and they had no idea that the said land is reserved for public utility and khaliyan and is gaon sabha land. It has been further submitted that she purchased it by making payment of Rs. 1,50,000/- and they have been falsely implicated, therefore, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that applicants have no criminal history and applicants is prepared to furnish sureties and bonds, there is no possibility of their either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the evidence.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and has submitted that the public utility land reserved for khaliyan belonging to the gaon sabha for purchased and sold by the accused persons and, therefore, the offence is serious.
Considering the submissions of both the sides. The ground taken for anticipatory bail is not adequate for the purpose and there appears to be no extraordinary circumstance, which is necessary for giving application for anticipatory bail and there is no immediate threat of their being arrest. As such, I do not find any ground for giving benefit of anticipatory bail, hence the anticipatory bail application filed by the applicants is
rejected .
A direction is, however, given to the court below that in case, applicants surrender and give bail application, the same shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously and preferably on the same day in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 18.8.2021 Mini
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the ground taken by the applicants is adequate for granting anticipatory bail.
Whether there are any extraordinary circumstances necessitating the grant of anticipatory bail.
Smt. Geeta and Another
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
