Dismissed

Aamir @ Rafey v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 Nov 2023ABAIL/12335/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An anticipatory bail application was dismissed because the offences were bailable or punishable by up to seven years imprisonment, and no reason to believe arrest was imminent was shown.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application refused; prayer is dismissed.

What the court decided

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:222359

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12335 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Aamir @ Rafey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amar Singh Yadav,Dilnawaz Ahmad Khan

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

Present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No. 0242 of 2023, u/s 498-A, 323, 506 of I.P.C., Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Sections 3/4 of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 and 67-b of Information Technology Act, Police Station - Saraimeer, District - Azamgarh.

¶7

Heard Sri Atul Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amar Singh Yadav and Sri Vipul Kumar Singh, learned counsels for the informant as well as Sri Yogesh Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has no concern with the present matter. He has been falsely implicated in this matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Applicant's case is squarely covered u/s 438 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that if the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest any time.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer and submitted that on the basis of instructions received, the police is not making any attempt to arrest the applicant, as the alleged offences are punishable with the imprisonment of maximum period of seven years.

¶10

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.

¶11

In this matter, as is evident from the record, offences levelled against the applicant are punishable with the imprisonment upto seven years. Specific provisions under Section 41-A CrPC have been provided giving protection to the accused person from arrest for the offences punishable upto seven years' imprisonment and in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another, (2014) 8 SCC 273, the Hon'ble Apex Court has also emphasized upon the power of police to arrest without warrant and it has been clarified that a balance between individual liberty and societal order should be made while exercising power of arrest. It has also been directed that where the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years, whether with or without fine, the police officer shall not arrest the accused unnecessarily and Magistrate shall not authorize detention casually and

¶12

mechanically. Even in Section 438 CrPC it has been promulgated that accused must have reason to believe that he may be arrested in cognizable offence by the police to get protection of anticipatory bail. Investigation in the matter is going on.

¶13

In the light of aforesaid provisions, the applicant has no reason to believe that he may be arrested. Hence, having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, no indulgence is warranted in the matter. Prayer made in the application is refused.

¶14

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶15

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶16

Order Date :- 23.11.2023 Siddhant

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Aamir @ Rafey v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Aamir @ Rafey 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

Sompal Vs State of U.P.

Vishal@ Mogala Vs State of U.P.

Azim @ Azimuddin Vs State of U.P.

Bhura Alias Taseen Vs State of U.P.and 2 Others

Prem Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Rajkumar Vs State of U.P. and Another