This single judge court dismissed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. noting the applicant was falsely implicated, and later instructed that regular bail may be sought.
Anticipatory bail application dismissed; applicant permitted to seek regular bail.
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:32766
Court No. - 14
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 248 of 2024
Applicant :- Satya Prakash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Lalji Prasad Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The instant application has been preferred by the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.698 of 2023, under Sections 420, 352, 506, 504 IPC, relating to police station Kotwali City, District Sitapur.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that he has been falsely implicated in the present case and that the applicant has not committed any fraudulent exercise.
It is further stated that the averments made in the FIR are purely self serving and the applicant does not have any criminal history except for two cases wherein the applicant has yet not summoned as mentioned in the supplementary affidavit.
Learned AGA has opposed application for grant of anticipatory bail and it has specifically been urged that the applicant had sold the said property to the complainant, thereafter, the said property was again resold to another party and this fact can be verified from sale deed which has been executed by the applicant himself.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, perused the material available on record and averments made in the FIR, this Court is not inclined to entertain the aforesaid bail application.
In view of the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to grant the benefit of the anticipatory bail. Consequently, the present
anticipatory bail application is dismissed. However, it shall be open for the applicant to seek regular bail and in case such an application is moved, the same shall be considered and decided by the Court concerned in light of the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC Online SC 825.
Order Date :- 26.4.2024
Harshita
Digitally signed by :- HARSHITA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in the facts of the present case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherReferred¶14
Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC Online SC 825 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Satya Prakash
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow
Jaspreet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
