This order rejected the applicant Nishant Yadav's anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. regarding an attempt to commit murder and other offences. The court held that interference would hamper the ongoing investigation.
Anticipatory bail application 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. - 15168 of 2021
Applicant :- Nishant Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar Kashyap,V.P. Singh Kashyap Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Sri Manish Kumar Kashyap, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Kesri Nandan Singh, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A and perused the record.
The instant application is being moved by the applicant namely, Nishant Yadav invoking the powers of Section 438 Cr.P.C. that he has every reason to believe that he may be arrested on the accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence in connection with Case Crime no. 368 of 2021, under Sections 307, 384, 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station- Kasganj, DistrictKasganj.
From the record, it is evident that the applicant has approached this Court after getting his anticipatory bail rejected from the court of sessions vide order dated 30.07.2021.
The perusal of the FIR indicates that the applicant has tried to dismantle the life of the victim. The investigation is going on and it would not be proper for the Court to interfere in the same.
Taking into account the role attributed to the applicant in commission of offence, 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 :- 16.8.2021 Nisha
Digitally signed by RAHUL CHATURVEDI Date: 2021.08.18 12:32:28 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the anticipatory bail application should be allowed given the applicant's role in attempting to dismantle the victim's life.
Whether the Court should interfere in the ongoing investigation into a serious offence.
Whether theapplicant should be granted anticipatory bail in view of the confessed attempt to kill the victim.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nishant Yadav
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
