Manoj Bharadwaj Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 84

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2549 of 2023

Applicant :- Manoj Bharadwaj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hardev Prajapati Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant - Manoj Bharadwaj in Case Crime No. 113 of 2022, under Section 420 I.P.C., Police Station - Soron, District - Kasganj.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA and perused the material available on record.

¶7

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.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer.

¶9

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

¶10

In this matter, as is evident from the record, offence levelled against the applicant is 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

¶11

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.

¶12

This Court directs that the Investigating Officer of the case would comply with the directions of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in Arnesh Kumar case (supra) in letter and spirit.

¶13

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶14

Order Date :- 11.4.2023 safi

¶15

Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Manoj Bharadwaj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Bharadwaj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pratyush Rajvanshi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Saiyad Itrat Husain Vs State of U.P.

Raju Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Rawat Vs State of U.P. and Another

Guddu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mukesh @ Jaully Vs State of U.P. and Another