Dismissed

Sanjay v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Jan 2023ABAIL/11822/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

GRA 80 decided anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. concerning an attempt to murder and cheating case. The court rejected the application because the offenses were punishable with less than 7 years imprisonment, meaning no apprehension of arrest existed.

What did the court decide?

Application rejected; applicant directed to move regular bail application if arrested under Section 438 Cr.P.C. held inapplicable.

Sanjay Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11822 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sanjay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Kumar,Ajay Kumar Giri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned counsel for the opposite party alongwith learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.306 of 2022, under sections 308, 324, 506, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Kurara, District Hamirpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶7

Facts in brief are that informant was beaten by this applicant with other co-accused persons in which injuries were caused to him regarding which an F.I.R. was lodged u/s 308, 506 read with 34 I.P.C.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has committed no offence and he has caused no any injury to the informant. On account of previous enmity he has been implicated in this case falsely and as per the medical report no case u/s 308 I.P.C. is made out. Therefore, applicant is under apprehension of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation.

¶9

Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and urged that the offences charged against the applicant are punishable with imprisonment less than 7 years regarding which protection of Section 41 Cr.P.C. is available to the applicant, therefore, there is no apprehension of arrest by the police against the applicant.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal of record, it appears that in this case the offences against the applicant are punishable with sentence of less than 7 years and the protection u/s 41 Cr.P.C. was already available to the applicant, therefore, there is no apprehension of arrest of the applicant by the police. In such a

¶11

situation, there appears no ground to grant anticipatory bail in favour of this applicant. Hence, the anticipatory bail application is, hereby, rejected.

¶12

However, if applicant appears and moves bail application before the court concerned, the same shall be decided as expeditiously as possible in light of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another LL 2021 SC 550 decided by Hon'ble the Apex Court.

¶13

Order Date :- 9.1.2023 Ashok Gupta

¶14

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sanjay v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay 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

Panna Lal and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul and Another Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Deepak Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Avdhesh Vs State of U.P.

Kamlesh Kumar Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Veer Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another