Anticipatory bail application moved under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was disposed of without hearing. The court held that since offences are punishable up to seven years and the applicant received Section 41-A notice, he has no apprehension of arrest.
Application disposed of; no need to proceed further; no anticipatory bail granted.
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:195631
Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9600 of 2023 Applicant :- Ajeet Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
Order Date :- 11.10.2023
safi
Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an anticipatory bail application needs to be heard when the accused has received a notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and the offences are punishable by up to seven years.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and anotherExplained¶8
(2014) 8 SCC 273 · Who else cites this
Md. Asfak Alam Vs. State of Jharkhand & AnrExplained¶8
2023 INSC 660 · Who else cites this
Ajeet
Nalin Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
