Allowed

Subhash Yadav v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC6 Jul 2022ABAIL/2333/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed the anticipatory bail application by granting liberty to the applicant to file a regular bail application before the competent court, given the statutory presumption against arrest non-compliance and the Apex Court ruling that arrest is unnecessary for crimes punishable below seven years if the accused cooperates with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file regular bail application before the competent court within three weeks; no custody till disposal of regular bail application.

Subhash Yadav Vs State of U.P.and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2333 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Subhash Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Prajapati Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Brijesh Kumar Prajapati, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is apprehending his arrest in Case Crime No. 0226 of 2021, under Sections 406, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station-Badalapur, DistrictJaunpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has not committed any offence as alleged and even no allegation relating to Section 406 I.P.C. has been made against the present applicant as the said allegations have been levelled against one coaccused Anil Bhawarlal Vishnoi therefore liberty of the present applicant be protected.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant has submitted that in view of Section 41-A Cr.P.C. the arrest of accused persons is not executed if he or she cooperates with the investigation. In the present case, FIR has been lodged on 26.07.2021 and the applicant has not been arrested till date, therefore, his aforesaid apprehension is absolutely misplaced. Besides, it has been submitted that in view of the dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021) where the punishment prescribed is below 7 years, arrest is not done. Therefore, the liberty of the applicant is already protected.

¶9

Considering the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I hereby dispose of the present anticipatory bail application finally at the admission stage giving liberty to the applicant to file his regular bail application before the competent court of law within a period of three weeks and if such an bail application is filed, the same shall be considered

¶10

and disposed of expeditiously preferably on the same date in the light of law laid down in S.K. Antil (Supra).

¶11

Till the disposal of bail application, the applicant shall not be taken into custody. However, it is made clear that if the applicant does not file his bail application within aforesaid period of three weeks, the protection of this order shall not be extended.

¶12

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶13

Order Date :- 6.7.2022 SY

¶14

Digitally signed by SWETA YADAV Date: 2022.07.08 10:27:15 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Subhash Yadav v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash Yadav 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

V.D. Agarwal Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Ranjana Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sukhpal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Shrikrishna Mittal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijaypal Vs State of U.P.

Shivam@ Shubham Gurjar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another