Disposed

Mamta v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2021ABAIL/6231/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed the anticipatory bail application as no exceptional grounds existed. However, it granted a conditional exemption: if the applicant surrenders within 60 days and applies for regular bail, her plea will be decided favorably according to cited precedents.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed unless applicant surrenders within 60 days, upon which bail would be decided favorably.

Mamta Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6231 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Mamta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Dubey 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. Anticipatory Bail Application

¶9

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Mamta, with a prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No. 5 of 2021, under Sections- 498-A, 323, 307, 504, 506, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station- Syana, District- Bulandshahar, 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 and on the request of learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 60 days from today and applies for bail, her 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 in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC).

¶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 her.

¶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 :- 5.3.2021 KS

Mamta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mamta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashish Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Anothers

Omprakash and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Harivansh Yadav Pahalwan Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Shankar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Sarvan Yadav and 3 Other Vs State of U.P.

Zeeshan Vs State of U.P.