The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) rejected an anticipatory bail application filed by Kuldeep in a criminal case involving alleged assault with a weapon causing injury to a vital part, noting the absence of false implication.
Application for anticipatory bail 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:62811
Court No. - 14
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2099 of 2024
Applicant :- Kuldeep
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Parijat Mishra Belaura Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for respondent State.
Notice to respondent no.2 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order.
The present application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0061 of 2024 under Section 307, 504 Indian Penal Code (Section 109, 352 BNS 2023), Police Station Piparpur, District Amethi (U.P.).
Perused the record.
Perusal of the statement of the injured shows that he has leveled specific allegation of assault by knife on the present applicant along with the co-accused. Injury is on vital part. No case of false implication appears to be made out. Complicity of the applicant is evident from the prosecution case.
Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is rejected.
Order Date :- 11.9.2024
Madhu
Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant facing charges under Section 307 and 504 IPC.
5 provisions across 3 enactments
Kuldeep
State Of U.P.
Karunesh Singh Pawar
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
