Dismissed

Arvind v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 Nov 2022ABAIL/11373/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The court held that the application was devoid of merit, noting that the applicant is the main accused causing grievous injuries and that arguments regarding regular bail could not be raised at this stage.

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application was dismissed for being devoid of merits.

Arvind Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11373 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Arvind Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammed Iftekhar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Mohammed Iftekhar, learned counsel for applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Geeta Kushwaha, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. for State and also perused the material available on record.

¶6

The present application for anticipatory bail has been filed for protection in regard to FIR/Case Crime No. 0484 of 2022, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 325, 394 I.P.C., P.S.Soraon, District- Prayagraj.

¶7

As per prosecution story, the applicant along with other coaccused persons are stated to have assaulted the informant on 14.7.2022 causing injuries to his nasal area thereby fracturing his nasal bone.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant belongs to scheduled caste category and has nothing to do with the said offence. The informant is an ex-army man and is a powerful person of the locality. Learned counsel has further stated that the injuries sustained by him are self-inflicted. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant has been explained in the affidavit. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length.

¶9

Per contra, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground that the criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant has not been explained as no order has been appended in the bail application. Learned counsels have further stated that the applicant is the main accused who assaulted the informant/injured person causing grievous injuries to him as he has sustained fracture on the nasal bone and, therefore, the

¶10

applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶11

Considering the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also the facts of the case, I do not find it a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. The arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant pertains to regular bail application and cannot be agitated at this stage.

¶12

In view of the above, the present anticipatory bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, dismissed .

¶13

Order Date :- 29.11.2022 Siddhant

¶14

Digitally signed by SIDDHANT SAHU Date: 2022.11.30 17:52:45 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arvind v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Vs State of U.P.

Sajan Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Umesh Kumar and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinay Vs State of U.P.

Vipinpal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Shailendra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others