In an anticipatory bail application, the court initially denied relief as offences were made out from the FIR. However, conditionally allowed the application by directing surrender within 90 days, threatening coercive action otherwise.
Application conditionally allowed; surrender directed within 90 days with threat of coercive action.
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. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8796 of 2020
Applicant :- Ashok Rawat And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mamta Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rahul Kumar Sharma
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Order on the Exemption Application
Application is allowed.
Order on the Anticipatory Bail
Heard learned counsel for the applicants; Shri Rahul Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Ashok Rawat and Sanjeev Rawat @ Teetu, with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 358 of 2020, under Sections- 452,386,504,506,507 IPC, Police StationHathras Kotwali, District- Hathras during pendency of trial.
The applicants are not entitled to be granted anticipatory bail. The offences alleged are prima facie made out from the allegations in the FIR.
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 90 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.
Till then no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.
However, in case, the applicants do not appear
before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
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.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 19.2.2021 Atul kr. sri.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicants are entitled to anticipatory bail in the charges under Sections 452, 386, 504, 506, and 507 IPC?
Whether conditional relief can be granted directing surrender within 90 days with consequences for non-compliance?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶11
2004 (57) ALR 290
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶11
2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ashok Rawat
Sanjeev Rawat
State Of U.P.
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
