The Allahabad High Court rejected an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The court held that since injuries were sustained by victims and other co-accused denied bail, no reason existed to grant bail to the applicants.
The anticipatory bail application was rejected.
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. - 2024:AHC-LKO:49755
Court No. - 31
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1284 of 2024
Applicant :- Danish And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Yadav,Vijay Pal Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)
Order Date :- 23.7.2024 Ram.
Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicants who allege false implication in the criminal case.
Whether the fact that other co-accused did not get bail influences the discretion to grant bail to these applicants.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satender Kumar Antil v. C.B.I.Referred¶11
Satender Kumar Antil v. C.B.I., (2022) 10 SCC 51 · Who else cites this
Satender Kumar Antil v. C.B.I.Referred¶14
Satender Kumar Antil v. C.B.I. (supra)
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Danish And Another
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another
Subhash Vidyarthi
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
