The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad entertained an anticipatory bail application. After observing that the applicant failed to cooperate, evaded coercive processes, and denied cooperating with the investigation, the Court held it was not a fit case to grant bail and rejected the application.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:164882
Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4326 of 2021
Applicant :- Ashish Pundhir And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Srivastava,Atul Kumar Shahi,Sumit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
concerned. Process under Sections 82 and 83 CrPC have also been issued against the applicant. 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.
embezzlement amount to the District Minority Welfare Officer by the applicant is false and fabricated and the signatures obtained on the receipts of such payment are forged. It is further submitted that there was no necessity to repay the money in cash instead of transferring it to the concerned bank account. It is next submitted that the withdrawal of money from the bank account of the institutions of the applicant no.1 does not necessarily mean that the same was actually repaid to the District Monitory Welfare Officer. It is further submitted that in this regard, a charge sheet has already been filed against the V.P. Singh, District Minority Welfare Officer, the co-accused and he was sent to jail. The alleged repayment of money by the applicant was a mere farce. It is further submitted that orders of NBW and proclamation under Sections 82 & 83 Cr.P.C. have been made under the instructions of the court against the applicant no.1 and a charge sheet has already been filed against him on 06.07.2023.
concerned, coercive processes have been issued against him.
It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.
It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court 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.
Order Date :- 11.8.2023 Shivangi
Digitally signed by :- SHIVANGI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant who failed to cooperate and evade coercive processes.
Whether issuance of coercive process like Notice under Section 82/83 CrPC bars the filing of an anticipatory bail application.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Manish Yadav Vs. State of U.P., 2022 0 Supreme (All) 629Referred¶15
Ashish Pundhir
Nalin Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
