Disposed

Antu @ Amit Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Mar 2021ABAIL/5985/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Judge Siddharth refused anticipatory bail citing lack of exceptional grounds but directed temporary protection pending surrender within 60 days. Failure to surrender invites coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Temporary protection granted pending surrender within 60 days; no anticipatory bail granted; coercive action may follow if surrender terms are not met.

Antu @ Amit Kumar and Another 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. - 5985 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Antu @ Amit Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jaysingh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Antu @ Amit Kumar and Deepak , with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 589 of 2009, under Sections- 147, 308, 325, 323, 504 IPC, Police Station- Bar, District- Lalitpur, during pendency of trial.

¶7

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.

¶8

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed, on the request of counsel for the applicants, that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 60 days from today and apply for bail, their 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 .

¶9

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

¶10

However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

Order Date :- 4.3.2021 Ruchi Agrahari

Antu @ Amit Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Antu @ Amit Kumar and Another 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

Dinesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Natthu and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Bholi and Another Vs State of U.P.

Kamruddin and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Haneef @ Dabbu @ Mohd Haneef Vs State of U.P.

Lal Mohammad and Another Vs State of U.P.