This single-sentence order rejected the anticipatory bail application of three applicants accused under sections 323, 308, 504, and 506 IPC. The court found no good ground for bail without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.
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. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13689 of 2021
Applicant :- Shankar Lal And 2 Other Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Bahadur Shivhare Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Om Vikram Singh Chauhan,Shiv Om Vikram Singh Chauhan
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
Heard Sri Vijay Bahadur Shivhare, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.O.V. Singh, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicants, namely, Shankar Lal, Akhilesh Kumar and Shailesh Kumar for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No 0109 of 2021, under Sections 323, 308, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sujanganj, District Jaunpur.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive; there is no direct evidence against the applicant. From perusal of X-ray report there is no fracture found over the body and no offence is made out under Section 308 I.P.C. The applicant having no previous criminal antecedents. It is submitted that the applicant is apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that applicants are named in the FIR and direct allegation against the applicants. He next argued that in FIR there is allegation against the applicants regarding injury to the victim, hence, the applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant may be rejected.
Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case and considering the submissions advanced, the nature and gravity of the accusation, I find no good ground for anticipatory bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case.
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected .
Order Date :- 7.12.2021 Nitin Verma
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to applicants falsely implicated in a case alleging injury without medical evidence of fracture.
Whether the algorithmic assessment of the nature and gravity of accusation warrants rejection of anticipatory bail.
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Shankar Lal
Akhilesh Kumar
Shailesh Kumar
State Of U.P.
Deepak Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
