The applicant filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for offenses under the Arms Act. The court reviewed the record and cited an Apex Court judgment but found no exceptional circumstances warranting bail, leading to the rejection of the application.
Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. rejected.
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. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2997 of 2022
Applicant :- Mohammad Vaseem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Order Date :- 20.4.2022 YK
Digitally signed by YASHWANT KUMAR Date: 2022.04.20 16:58:33 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case involving Sections 5/25 Arms Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of EnforcementReferred¶8
P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, AIR 2019 SC 4198 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mohammad Vaseem
State of U.P.
Another
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
