The Court rejected an anticipatory bail application due to lack of compelling or special circumstances justifying a direct approach to High Court under Section 438 Cr.P.C., citing Ankit Bharti precedent.
Anticipatory Bail application rejected; prayer refused.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:190385
Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10020 of 2023
Applicant :- Abhay Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
this Court directly without having any rejection order from the Court of Session and all the three grounds, which have been mentioned above, do not cover within the category of special or exceptional circumstances. Prayer made in the application is refused.
Order Date :- 4.10.2023 Fhd
Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether compelling or special circumstances exist to allow direct approach to High Court for anticipatory bail without prior rejection by Session Court.
Whether the applicant has established special circumstances such as co-accused approach, police harassment, or student status to bypass Court of Session.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ankit Bharti vs. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶4
Ankit Bharti vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020 (3) ADJ 165 (F.B.)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Abhay Kumar
Nalin Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
