In the pending trial of a dispute relating to an FIR under sections 323, 324, 452 I.P.C., the court refused anticipatory bail because applicants were avoiding court process in an offence punishable with a sentence under 7 years.
Prayer for grant of anticipatory bail is 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.
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12257 of 2022
Applicant :- Vivek And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.136 of 2021, under sections 323, 324, 452 I.P.C., Police Station Makkhanpur, District Firozabad, during the pendency of trial.
Facts in brief are that in this case there was dispute between the informant and applicants relating to which an F.I.R. was lodged u/s 323, 324, 452 I.P.C.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants have committed no offence. The matter has already been investigated and charge sheet has been submitted against the applicants in which cognizance was taken by the learned court concerned. Now apprehension of arrest of the applicants has arisen on account of issuance of process by the leaned court concerned, therefore, requested to grant anticipatory bail. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and urged that all the offences said to have been committed by the applicants are punishable with sentence less than 7 years, therefore, there may be no apprehension of arrest of the applicants.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal of record, it appears that in this case all the offences said to have been committed by the applicants are punishable with sentence less than 7 years and after investigation charge sheet has been submitted before the learned court concerned but applicants are avoiding the process of the court. In such a situation, there is no ground to grant anticipatory bail in favour of these applicants. Hence, the prayer
for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, refused.
However, if applicants appear and move bail application before the learned court concerned, the same shall be decided as expeditiously as possible in the light of law as 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.
Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 11.1.2023 Ashok Gupta
Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted where the accused are avoiding the process of the court in an offence punishable with a sentence of less than 7 years.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherReferred¶12
Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another LL 2021 SC 550.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vivek And 2 Others
Subhash Chandra Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
