Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for an FIR under robbery and cheating/forgery IPC sections was dismissed after the applicant sought to withdraw it on the hearing date.
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:131276
Court No. - 77
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6678 of 2024
Applicant :- Kaushlendra Singh Alias Rahul Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
"1. Heard Sri Kunwar Mayank Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Triveni Saran Rai learned counsel for the State and perused the record.
2. At the very outset, learned State counsel submits that non bailable warrants have been issued against the applicant by the court concerned and the applicant had approached this Court previously in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 866 of 2021 (Kaushlendra (Singh) Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others), which was dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to seek anticipatory bail/bail by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.2.2021. Subsequent to it the applicant filed a Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 13650 of 2021 before this Court which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach the learned Sessions Judge and apply for anticipatory bail vide order dated 18.11.2021. Subsequently the applicant after three years has approached this Court by filing present anticipatory bail. It is submitted that since non bailable warrants have been issued against the applicant and despite his being in the knowledge about the proceedings against him, he has been absconding intentionally, his case cannot be looked into in view of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana vs. Dharmraj: 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1085 and Srikant Upadhyay and others vs. State of Bihar and another: Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 7940 of 2023, decided on 14.03.2024.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant prays for two weeks time meet out the same. Prayer is allowed.
4. List on 13.08.2024."
(Samit Gopal,J.)
Order Date :- 13.8.2024 Manoj
Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Haryana vs. DharmrajReferred¶3
State of Haryana vs. Dharmraj: 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1085 · Who else cites this
Srikant Upadhyay and others vs. State of Bihar and anotherReferred¶3
Srikant Upadhyay and others vs. State of Bihar and another: Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 7940 of 2023
6 provisions across 2 enactments
Kaushlendra Singh Alias Rahul Chauhan
State of U.P.
Samit Gopal
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
