Dismissed¶10

Govind v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC11 Aug 2022ABAIL/4678/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, single judge (Raj Beer Singh, J.), anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. rejected in Case Crime No.151/2022, Sections 420/386/379/506/34 IPC, P.S. Ujhani, District Budaun; taxi snatching case; applicant Govind not named in FIR per defence, NBWs issued per State; protective direction to decide regular bail expeditiously upon surrender within two weeks. Keywords: anticipatory bail, S.438 CrPC, IPC 420/386/379/506/34, rejection, surrender, expeditious bail consideration.

What did the court decide?

No relief of anticipatory bail; however, direction that if the applicant surrenders before the court below within two weeks and applies for bail, his bail application shall be considered and decided expeditiously, in accordance with settled law. ¶10

Govind Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4678 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Govind Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Shankar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This anticipatory bail application has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.151/2022, under Sections 420/386/379/506/34 IPC, P.S. Ujhani, District Budaun with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶7

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. According to prosecution version, co-accused Shishupal, Ranjeet and their three companions have booked the taxi of complainant for going to Budaun and in the way, they have overpowered the complainant/driver and ran away with the taxi of complainant. Learned counsel submitted that applicant is not named in the first information report and that his involvement has been shown on the basis of statement of co-accused persons. The said taxi has already been recovered. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and that applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It was further submitted that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail

¶8

he would co-operate during investigation and trial and would obey the conditions of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and argued that in the alleged incident, the taxi of complainant was forcibly snatched and took away by applicant and co-accused persons. The applicant is continuously absconding and he is not co-operating in investigation and that non-bailable warrants have already been issued against him. The applicant has not even filed his affidavit in support of his application.

¶10

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations and all attending facts of the matter, the applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail. Hence the present application for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.

¶11

However, it is directed that in case, applicant surrenders before the court below within two weeks from today and applies for bail, his bail application shall be considered and decided expeditiously, in accordance with settled law.

¶12

Order Date :- 11.8.2022 Neeraj

¶13

Digitally signed by NEERAJ KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.08.11 13:53:27 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Govind v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govind v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Siddh Nath Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akhilesh Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Asim Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ikrar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Varun Vs State of U.P.

Shivkant Nishad Vs State of U.P. and Another