Anees v. State of U.P. and Another
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. invoked in a case for offences including lynching and dowry-related crimes. The applicant denied involvement, stating false implication, while the State alleged resistance to arrest, attacks on police with stones, and injury to a constable. Noting the applicant's criminal history of 22 cases, the court held the ap
What did the court decide?
The anticipatory bail application was rejected; it was held not a fit case to grant benefit of anticipatory bail.
What the court decided
Court No. - 85 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13583 of 2022 Applicant :- Anees Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Abid Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.
- Heard Sri Mohammad Abid Ali, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri O.P. Mishra, learned AGA for the State and perused the papers on record.
- The present application has been moved on behalf of the applicant- Anees seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 0280 of 2022, under Sections 147, 224, 307, 353, 427, 436 I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Bhamaura, District Bareilly.
- As per prosecution case, when the police force raided the residence of the applicant-Anees for execution of warrant against him and to arrest him, the women of his house and the applicant Anees resisted his arrest; all of them attacked the police party with stones; also damaged the vehicle being used by the police; caused injuries to constable-Siddhant Chaudhary.
- It is contended on behalf of the applicant that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated by the police for ulterior motives and that no such incident ever took place.
- The anticipatory bail application is opposed by the other side contending that life and well-being of the police personnel, who were on official duty, were threatened by the applicant and the members of his house; they were not allowed to arrest the applicant (who was wanted in a case) and threw stones on the police party; it is further pointed out that the applicant has having criminal history of 22 cases which has not been explained and refuted by the applicant.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the present case constitutes a fit case to grant the benefit of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Whether the applicant's criminal antecedents and nature of alleged offence justify refusal of anticipatory bail.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Anees
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Jyotsna Sharma
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · February
- Registered
- Case no.
- ABAIL/13583/2022
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court