The Court rejected an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. Considering the nature of the accusation, the gravity of the offence, and the applicant's alleged role, the Court held it was not a fit case for bail and dismissed the prayer.
Prayer for anticipatory bail refused and application rejected.
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. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2013 of 2023
Applicant :- Deepak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant Deepak seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 385 of 2022, under Sections 354, 376, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Maharajganj, District Azamgarh.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. The investigation of the case is going on. It has been submitted that in case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that though no allegation of rape has been made in the F.I.R. but the prosecutrix in her statement under Section 161 CrPC has made specific allegation against the present applicant for committing rape against her and further in her statement under Section 164 CrPC also she has narrated the same facts before the Court concerned. The victim has also been medically examined and it is further submitted that she has also complained of sexual harassment before the medical examiner.
I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of
investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, llikelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.
Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, nature of accusation, role of applicant, all attending facts and circumstances of the case and the gravity of the offence and active participation of the applicant in the said offence, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant. Prayer made in the application is refused.
The application is rejected .
Order Date :- 18.4.2023
safi
Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail in the pending criminal case alleging sexual offences.
Whether the gravity of the offence and role of the applicant make it a fit case for grant of bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and anotherReferred¶10
Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Deepak
State of U.P.
Nalin Kumar Srivastava
Mahboob Safi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
