Dismissed

Kanha v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2023ABAIL/3402/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case involving rape and abduction. The court directed that if the applicant surrenders and seeks regular bail, the lower court must comply with the Satender Kumar Antil judgment.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail rejected; directions issued for lower court compliance on regular bail.

Kanha Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3402 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Kanha Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Som Veer Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant - Kanha in Criminal Case No.131/IX of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No.320 of 2018, under Sections 366, 376, 342, 506, 372 (3) I.P.C. and Section 5 Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, Police Station - Farah, District - Mathura.

¶7

It reveals from perusal of the record that applicant has forcefully committed rape with the prosecutrix who happens to wife of the informant and he kept her with him for 6-7 months, any how she rescued from possession of the accused. In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the prosecutrix has narrated in detail that the offence committed by the accused and his active participation in the alleged offence. During investigation sufficient evidence has been collected and charge sheet has been submitted since long back in the year 2019.

¶8

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I find no ground to grant anticipatory bail to applicant. It is accordingly rejected .

¶9

It is made clear that if the applicant surrenders or brought before the court and moves application for bail, the same shall be considered and decided by the Court concerned in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825 .

¶10

On the basis of request of the learned counsel for the applicant, it is further directed that the Court concerned while considering the bail application of the applicant in the light of Satender Kumar

¶11

Antil case (supra), shall pass an order strictly in compliance of the directions given in the aforesaid judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in letter and spirit, particularly complying with the order dated 21.3.2023 of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid matter.

¶12

Order Date :- 5.4.2023 Atul

¶13

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kanha v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanha v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Tahir Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Vs State of U.P.

Banshi and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sabrez @ Munna Metro Vs State of U.P.

Manu Vs State of U.P.

Ram Ujageer Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others