Dismissed¶18

Suraj Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Anticipatory bail – maintainability

Allahabad HC26 Oct 2023ABAIL/11658/2023

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC filed by Suraj Singh in Case Crime No. S.T. No. 417 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime no. 0025 of 2014, under Sections 148, 302, 149, 307, 149, 323/149 IPC, Police Station Kiratpur, District Bijnor. The Allahabad High Court (Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.; Court No. 73; Order Date 26.10.2023; Neutral Citation 2023:AHC:203697) upheld the AGA's preliminary objection and held the application not maintainable under Section 438(6) CrPC as applicable in U.P., rejecting it without going into the merits.

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application is not maintainable, since the case falls within the category of cases mentioned in Section 438(6) CrPC (as applicable in U.P. by way of U.P. Act No. 4 of 2019, Section 2, w.e.f. 1.6.2019). ¶18

Suraj Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:203697

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11658 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Suraj Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Mishra,Hemendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant Suraj Singh seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. S.T. No. 417 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime no. 0025 of 2014, under Sections 148, 302, 149, 307, 149, 323/149 I.P.C., Police StationKiratpur, District- Bijnor.

¶7

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

¶8

At the outset, a preliminary objection has been raised by the learned AGA about maintainability of this anticipatory bail application and it is submitted that the present anticipatory bail application has been filed for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. whereas Section 438 (6) CrPC (as applicable in U.P. by way of U.P. Act No. 4 of 2019, Section 2, w.e.f 1.6.2019), provides that :

¶9

"(6) Provisions of this section shall not be applicable,

¶10

(a) to the offences arising out of-

¶11

(i) the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967;

¶12

(ii) the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985;

¶13

(iii) the Official Secret Act, 1923;

¶14

(iv) the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.

¶15

(b) in the offences, in which death sentence can be awarded."

¶16

It is further submitted that since the present anticipatory bail application has been filed for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C., in view of the provisions of Section 438(6) CrPC the same is not

¶17

maintainable.

¶18

Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, in my view, since the case clearly falls into the category of cases which have been mentioned in Section 438(6) CrPC, (as applicable in U.P. by way of U.P. Act No. 4 of 2019, Section 2, w.e.f 1.6.2019), the present anticipatory bail application is not maintainable. Hence, without going into the merits of the case, the present anticipatory bail application is rejected .

¶19

Order Date :- 26.10.2023 Fhd

¶20

Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Suraj Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivchand Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Brijesh Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Prashant @ Titu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brijesh Kumar Shahi @ Brijesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Suresh Chandra Jaiswal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another