Disposed

Smt. Upasna Devi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Sept 2021ABAIL/12583/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant moved for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. directly to the High Court without exhausting the remedy before the Sessions Court, relying on a Full Bench judgment. The court accepted the special reasons and granted protection from arrest until the filing of a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application or one month.

What did the court decide?

Interim stay on arrest granted until the applicant moves under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or one month from the order date.

Smt. Upasna Devi Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

In Chamber

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12583 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Upasna Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arun K. Singh Deshwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

(1) Heard Shri Arun K. Singh Deshwal, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A and perused the record.

¶6

(2) The instant application is being moved by the applicant invoking the powers of Section 438 Cr.P.C. that she has every reason to believe that she may be arrested on the accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence in Case Crime No.0191 of 2020, under Sections 419, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station-Puramufti, District-Kaushambi.

¶7

(3) From the record, it is evident that the applicant has approached this Court straightway without getting his anticipatory bail rejected from the Court of Sessions.

¶8

(4) Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of the Court to Clause-7 of Section 438 Cr.P.C. (U.P. Act No.4 of 2019), which read thus :

¶9

" (7) If an application under this section has been made by any person to the High Court, no application by the same person shall be entertained by the Court of Session. "

¶10

(5) After interpreting the aforesaid clause, it is clear that the Legislature in its own wisdom bestowed two avenues upon the accused with a rider that if the accused has chosen to come to the High Court straightaway, then he would not be relegated back to exhaust his remedy before the Court of Session first. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Ankit Bharti and others Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020(3) ADJ 575 in which the Bench has directed to spell out the extraordinary and special reasons for coming to the High Court. After perusal of those pleadings/reasons in this regard, this Court is satisfied that the reasons mentioned therein are quite convincing to entertain the present anticipatory bail application before this Court itself.

¶11

(6) Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P. , hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A. as per Section 438(3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required.

¶12

(7) Contention raised by learned counsel for the applicant is that the police after investigation has submitted charge sheet and the court has taken cognizance in the matter.

¶13

(8) Charge sheet has been submitted and the cognizance has been taken upon the same. Now the sufficiency or insufficiency of the material collected against the accused cannot be adjudicated in the exercise of power u/s 438 Cr.P.C. After the submission of charge sheet and cognizance order the status of accused got changed, keeping in view the material collected against him during the investigation. If so advised, the applicant may initiate any other proceedings in accordance with law.

¶14

(9) Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes to invoke the powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C. before appropriate jurisdiction to ventilate her grievance. He, therefore, requested that since the police is hotly chasing the applicant, her interest may be protected for the time being.

¶15

(10) The offer made by the learned counsel for the applicant seems to be justified. Till the said application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is filed by the applicant or till one month from today, whichever is earlier, the applicant shall not be arrested in aforesaid case crime.

¶16

(11) With the aforesaid direction the instant anticipatory bail application stands disposed off.

¶17

Order Date :- 20.9.2021 M. Kumar

¶18

Digitally signed by RAHUL CHATURVEDI Date: 2021.09.22 11:14:22 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Upasna Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Upasna Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subhash Chandra Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shamsahad Muhammad @ Muhammad Shamasad and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jai Prakash Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Prakash Vs State of U.P

Ganga Saran and another Vs State of u.p. and another

Vijay Vs State of U.P and Another