The Court heard an anticipatory bail application filed by Pappu Alias Randhir under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with a case under the U.P. Excise Act. Relying on precedent, the Court found no exceptional grounds to exercise discretion and rejected the application.
No anticipatory bail granted.
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. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11360 of 2021
Applicant :- Pappu Alias Randhir Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Santosh Singh, learned counsel for applicant and Mr. Indrapal Singh Rajpoot, learned A.G.A. assisted by Mr. P.K. Sahi, learned brief-holder for State, through video conferencing.
This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicant- Pappu alias Randhir in connection with Case Crime No.0211 of 2021, under Section 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station- Partapur, District- Meerut.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of material brought on record as well as complicity of accused and also judgment of Apex Court in P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, AIR 2019 SC 4198 , this Court does not find any exceptional ground to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, the present application for anticipatory bail is rejected .
Order Date :- 2.6.2021 Saif
Digitally signed by Justice Rajeev Misra Date: 2021.06.03 11:14:52 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with a case under Section 63 of U.P. Excise Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of EnforcementReferred¶7
P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, AIR 2019 SC 4198 · Who else cites this
Pappu Alias Randhir
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
