Disposed

Yunus v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2023ABAIL/5059/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this short order on an anticipatory bail application under S. 438 Cr.P.C., the single judge dismissed the application citing no case for interference but directed the applicant to surrender within one month and file a regular bail application in view of the Satender Kumar Antil guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Applicant directed to surrender within one month; to file regular bail application subsequently.

Yunus Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:155675

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5059 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Yunus Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satyam Narayan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶8

The present application for anticipatory bail has been filed for protection in regard to FIR/Case Crime No. 35 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 452, 323, 324, 504 I.P.C., P.S.- Jani, District- Meerut.

¶9

After arguing for some time, applicant's counsel submits that the present application for anticipatory bail may be disposed of with a direction to file a regular bail application which may be decided keeping in view the guidelines as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another , reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 825 .

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has no objection to the prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, no case is made out for interference u/s 438 Cr.P.C. The present anticipatory bail application is disposed of with a direction that the applicant shall surrender before the concerned court within one month from today and in case, a regular bail application is filed, the same be decided in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra) .

¶12

For the period of one month from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the concerned court, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant, in the above case.

¶13

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶14

Order Date :- 2.8.2023 Shalini

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Yunus v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yunus v. State of U.P.

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

Radheshyam Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Salim Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ajeet Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anil Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Munesh Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anurag Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another