Dismissed

Prashant Kumar Singh @ Shani Singh v. State of U.P. and Others

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2021ABAIL/13292/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail rejected. Court noted applicant approached High Court without seeking rejection from lower court despite Section 438 Clause 7 restrictions, cited criminal history and failure to cooperate with investigation.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. rejected; applicant may face arrest as per investigation.

Prashant Kumar Singh @ Shani Singh Vs State of U.P. and… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13292 of 2021 Applicant :- Prashant Kumar Singh @ Shani Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Kant Shukla

¶2

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material on record.

¶4

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.09 of 2018, under Sections 60/63 of U.P. Excise Act and Section 272, 273, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station-Maniar, District-Ballia.

¶5

From the record, it is evident that the applicant has approached this Court straightway without getting his anticipatory bail rejected from the court below.

¶6

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 2021), which read thus :

¶7

" (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. "

¶8

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.

¶9

Learned A.G.A has submitted that the applicant has got a long criminal history of eight cases of the year 2016-17 and 2017-18 and he is misusing the liberty granted by this Court on 24.01.2019. The police report dated 28.05.2021 shows that sufficient material was recovered against the applicant during investigation but he is neither surrendering nor participating in the investigation. The applicant is playing tricks and games during the investigation.

¶10

Taking into account the role attributed to the applicant in commission of offence, the Court feels that in order to have in-depth probe into the matter, the Investigating Officer of the case should be given fullest liberty to choose its own course for the transparent investigation.

¶11

Thus, giving a panoramic view of the matter, the Court is not inclined to exercise its powers in favour of the applicants, and thus the present anticipatory bail application is hereby rejected .

¶12

Digitally signed by Justice Rahul Order Date :- 26.7.2021/Sumit S Chaturvedi Date: 2021.07.27 18:33:25 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Prashant Kumar Singh @ Shani Singh v. State of U.P. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prashant Kumar Singh @ Shani Singh v. State of U.P. and Others

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

Sarvesh Devi Vs State of U.P.

Devicharan Vs State of U.P.

Madan Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Sharik Quraishi Kasai Vs State of U.P and Another

Ajeet Yadav Vs State of Up

Surendri & Another Vs State of U.P. and Another