Disposed

Dhruv Kumar @ Dhruv v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Feb 2021ABAIL/3923/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed an anticipatory bail application in 498-A and dowry cases, holding no exceptional grounds exist. Applicant directed to surrender within 90 days for bail consideration; otherwise, coercive action will be taken.

What did the court decide?

Application finally disposed; applicant directed to surrender within 90 days for bail consideration; no coercive action pending compliance.

Dhruv Kumar @ Dhruv Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3923 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Dhruv Kumar @ Dhruv Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶6

Order on Criminal Misc. Exemption Application

¶7

This exemption application is allowed.

¶8

Order on Criminal Misc. Bail Application

¶9

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Dhruv Kumar @ Dhruv, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.0158 of 2017 and Case No. 2863 of 2018, under Sections498-A, 323, 504, 506, 342 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Gautambudh Nagar, during pendency of trial.

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of material brought on record as well as complicity of accused and also judgement of the Apex Court in the case of P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, AIR 2019 SC 4198 , this Court does not finds any exceptional ground to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶11

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed, on the request of counsel for the applicant, that in case the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 90 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided as per the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P .

¶12

Till then no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.

¶13

However, in case, the applicant does not appears before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶14

It is made clear that the applicant will not be granted any further time by this court for surrendering before the court below as directed above.

¶15

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of .

¶16

Order Date :- 24.2.2021 SS

Dhruv Kumar @ Dhruv v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhruv Kumar @ Dhruv v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Than Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Ahmad Ali Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Singh Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Mehtab Vs State of U.P.

Rambabu @ Ram Prakash Sah Vs State of U.P. and Another

Guru Charan and 8 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another