In an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the applicant sought protection against arrest in an allegedly false First Information Report. The high court observed no good grounds for bail and rejected the application.
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. - 87
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 17674 of 2021
Applicant :- Sri Niwas And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Singh,Shivam Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sadhna Rani (Thakur),J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the material available on record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.81 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 308, 332, 353, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Sahpau District Hathras.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that only 3 applicants are named in the first information report. Shiv Kumar is not named in the F.I.R. His name came into light during investigation. No specific role has been assigned to any of the applicants. Two persons are said to have been injured in the incident. The applicants have not committed any offence. The applicants have apprehension that they may be arrested in this case on the basis of the impugned first information report, so payer for anticipatory bail is made.
Learned A.G..A has opposed the bail application on the ground that investigation is still in progress. The two public servants have sustained injuries in the incident during discharge of their official duties, hence, the anticipatory bail is opposed.
The perusal of the first information report makes clear that the case belongs to the illegal mining of the soil and when the police party checked the applicants and asked for license they are said to be assaulted with spade and lathi danda as a result of which two police personnel have sustained injuries. The injuries of one injured are said to be simple in nature but the other injured Rohit Yadav has got fractured his left parietal bone.
After hearing the learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A., and after perusing the averments made in the present anticipatory bail application as well as rejection order, this Court is of the opinion, that learned counsel for the applicant could not point out any good ground for grant of anticipatory
bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the applicant is hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 16.12.2021 Gss
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicants in the pending criminal investigation.
Whether the apprehension of arrest in the present case is reasonable or sufficient for bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Niwas and 3 Others
Sadhna Rani Thakur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
