Single judge rejected the application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C., holding that there was no apprehension of arrest since no coercive steps or warrants had been issued against the applicant over two years after the charge sheet was filed.
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. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 14001 of 2021
Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Heard Sri Ashutosh Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant on the prayer for anticipatory bail; Sri O.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondent and perused the record.
The present anticipatory bail application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant-Rakesh Kumar Sharma with a prayer to release the applicant on anticipatory bail in case crime No. 27 of 2019, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 406 IPC, P.S. Chandausi, District Sambhal.
Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant is not named in the FIR; earlier also during investigation, in the same case crime number, vide order dated 8.8.2019, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court allowed the anticipatory bail application of the applicant till submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. and after investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the applicant on 25.8.2019, therefore, his anticipatory bail again be considered till submission of the charge sheet.
Per contra, learned AGA contended that charge sheet has been submitted in the month of August, 2019 and more than two years have already been passed and in the entire application, there is no mention of the fact that there is apprehension to the applicant that he may be arrested in the present case. He further contended that no document has been filed by the applicant to show that whether any warrant was issued against him by the trial court or not.
As the matter is of the year 2019 and charge sheet way back in the month of July, 2019 has already been filed and there is nothing on record which can show that any coercive step has been taken by the court below against the applicant, therefore, it appears that there is no eminent danger for the applicant to be arrested in the
present matter. As per Section 438 Cr.P.C., it is condition precedent that the anticipatory bail application can only be entertained when there is apprehension to the accused for his arrest, which is lacking in the present case.
In view of the above, anticipatory bail application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. is, hereby, rejected .
Order Date :- 2.12.2021 Ankita
1 issue framed by the court
Whether leaves of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. be granted when there is no apprehension of arrest and no warrant has been issued against the applicant despite the lapse of two years sin
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rakesh Kumar Sharma
State of U.P.
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
