The single judge dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed by Paras Malik in a rape case. The court rejected the claim of false implication and blackmail, noting the incompatibility of timelines in allegations, and found no grounds for bail.
Application dismissed; applicant may approach the lower court for regular bail.
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. - 38
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10401 of 2021
Applicant :- Paras Malik Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
application, when filed, may be heard on it's own merit, as expeditiously as possible, without being influenced by any observation made in this order.
Order Date :- 22.6.2021 Saif
3 issues framed by the court
Whether grounds are made out for grant of anticipatory bail when an amendment of rape charge follows a blackmail allegation during investigation.
Whether the timeline discrepancy regarding the blackmail complaint negates the claim of false implication.
Whether an application for anticipatory bail should be dismissed pending trial investigation.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Paras Malik
Saumitra Dayal Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
