Mantu Rauniyar v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
The applicant sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. fearing arrest in a POCSO and IPC case. The court noted the application was filed directly without prior rejection at the trial court level. Considering the specific allegations and need for thorough investigation, the court rejected the application.
What did the court decide?
The anticipatory bail application was rejected.
What the court decided
Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12864 of 2021 Applicant :- Mantu Rauniyar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material on record.
The instant application is being moved by the applicant invoking the powers of Section 438 Cr.P.C. apprehending his arrest in connection with Case Crime no.0027 of 2021, under Sections 354 I.P.C. and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act and Section 376AB IPC and Section 17/18 of POCSO Act, Police StationVishunpura, District- Kushinagar.
From the record, it is evident that the applicant has approached this Court straightway without getting his anticipatory bail rejected from the court below.
Learned counsel for the applicants has drawn attention of the Court to Clause-7 of Section 438 Cr.P.C. (U.P. Act No.4 of 2021), which read thus :
" (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. "
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 under Section 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Vs. 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.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an anticipatory bail application should be allowed given the specific allegations against the applicant and the absence of prior rejection by the court below.
Whether the nature of the allegations and the applicant's role warrant refusal of liberty to ensure an in-depth investigation.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Mantu Rauniyar
Coram
Rahul Chaturvedi
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- ABAIL/12864/2021
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court