The Allahabad High Court rejected an anticipatory bail application filed by Kishanveer Singh regarding FIR allegations of house intrusion, misbehavior with a woman, and theft. The court declined bail citing the gravity of the accusation and the need for a transparent investigation.
The anticipatory bail application was rejected.
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. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 14400 of 2021 Applicant :- Kishanveer Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Applicant :- Som Veer Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ashutosh Tiwari,Raghvendra Prakash,Rajat Kumar Shukla
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. Perused the record.
By means of the present application the applicant is seeking his anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.119 of 2021, under Sections 452, 354, 506, 380 I.P.C., Police Station-Sadar Bazar, DistrictMathura.
From the record, it is evident that the applicant has approached this Court after getting his anticipatory bail rejected from the Court of Session vide order dated 30.6.2021.
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.
As per the allegation made in the F.I.R., the applicant is said to have intruded into the house of the informant and misbehaved with her and also threatened her for life. A mobile belongs to the informant also said to have been stolen by the applicant.
Taking into account the gravity of accusation, the Court feels that in order to have indepth probe into the matter, the Investigating Officer of the case should be given fullest liberty to choose its own course for the transparent investigation. Thus, giving a panoramic view of the matter the Court is not inclined to exercise its powers in favour of the applicant, and thus the present anticipatory bail application is hereby REJECTED.
Order Date :- 9.8.2021 M. Kumar
Digitally signed by RAHUL CHATURVEDI Date: 2021.08.10 18:48:34 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. should be granted given the gravity of the criminal accusations.
Whether the applicant has a reasonable apprehension of arrest due to the FIR allegations of intrusion and threat.
Kishanveer Singh
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
