Anticipatory bail application (S. 438 CrPC) filed by Krishna Avatar regarding offences punishable up to seven years. The court held that no apprehension of arrest existed and bail was not warranted. Application disposed of and refused.
Prayer for anticipatory bail refused and application disposed of.
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. - 2173 of 2023
Applicant :- Krishna Avatar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Umendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
Present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant - Krishna Avatar in Case Crime No. 07 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 308 I.P.C., Police Station - Kant, District - Shahjahanpur.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA and perused the material available on record.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has no concern with the present matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Applicant's case is squarely covered under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Investigation in the matter is going on. 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.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer.
I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.
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 mechanically. Even in Section 438 CrPC it has been promulgated that accused must have reason to believe that he may be arrested in cognizanble offence by the police to get protection of anticipatory bail. 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.
The application stands disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 23.3.2023 safi
Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant given the allegations and lack of apprehension of arrest.
Krishna Avatar
State of U.P.
Krishna Avatar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
