Dismissed

Suresh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Jul 2024ABAIL/6255/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a 2011 case under Sections 452, 306, 504, 506 IPC. The applicant was charge-sheeted, failed to appear despite summons and was declared absconder with process under Sections 82/83 Cr.P.C. Following the Apex Court decision in Srikant Upadhyay, the court held the applicant not entitled to anticipatory bail and rejected the application.

What the court decided

AI extract

Suresh Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:114001

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6255 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Suresh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pranshu Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Case diary as well as written instructions produced by learned AGA, are also taken on record.

¶7

This application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 48 of 2011, under Sections 452, 306, 383 (Gha), 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Bhognipur, District Kanpur Dehat.

¶8

At the outset, learned AGA submits that the applicant is absconding and is evading the process of law. Process under Section 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. has also been issued against him. On that ground, he submits that the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶9

Heard Sri Pranshu Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶10

The charge sheet against the applicant has been submitted before the trial court. The applicant has failed to appear before the trial court after receipt of the summons. The applicant has been declared as absconder. Process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. and 83 Cr.P.C. has been issued against him. The issuance of process under Section 82/83 Cr.P.C. has also not been disputed by the counsel for the applicant.

¶11

The Apex Court in the case of Srikant Upadhyay and others vs. State of Bihar and another, (2024) 3 SCR 421 in paragraphs 25 and 26 has held as under:-

¶12

"25. The factual narration made hereinbefore would revel the consistent disobedience of the appellants to comply with the orders of the trial Court. They failed to appear before the Trial Court after the receipt of the summons, and then after the issuance of bailable warrants even when the are co-

¶13

accused, after the issuance of bailable warrants, applied and obtained regular bail. Though the appellants filed an application, which they themselves described as "bail-cum-surrender application" on 23.08.2022, they got it withdrawn on the fear of being arrested. Even after the issuance of non-bailable warrants on 03.11.2022 they did not care to appear before the Trial Court and did not apply for regular bail after its recalling. It is a fact that even after coming to know about the proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., the did not take any steps to challenge the same or to enter appearance before the Trial Court to avert the consequences. Such conduct of the appellants in the light of the aforesaid circumstances, leaves us with no hesitation to hold that they are not entitled to seek the benefit of pre-arrest bail.

¶14

26. The upshot of the discussion is that there is no ground for interfering with the order of the High Court rejecting the application for anticipatory bail rather not considering application on merits. Since their action is nothing short of defying the lawful orders of the Court and attempting to delay the proceedings, this appeal must fails. Consequently, it is dismissed."

¶15

In view thereof, the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶16

Accordingly, the application is hereby rejected.

¶17

Order Date :- 18.7.2024 Lbm/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Suresh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Suresh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Anil Kumar Tiwari @ Suneel and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Smt Nisha Lambert and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Siddhu @ Sidu vs State of U.P. and Another

Devendra Kumar Sharma and Another vs State of Up and Another

Jitendra Kanaujiya vs State of Up and Another

Vansh Chaudhary vs State of U.P.