Smt Reena v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC6 Aug 2024ABAIL/7653/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought anticipatory bail in a case involving assault and hurt charges. The court considered the nature of injuries and the distinct considerations for anticipatory bail versus regular bail. Due to the presence of grievous injuries to one of the injured persons, the application was rejected.

What the court decided

AI extract

Smt Reena vs State of Up and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶24

A three Judge bench of the Supreme Court in Dr. Naresh Kumar Mangla vs. Smt. Anita Agarwal & others, AIR 2021 SC 277 , broadly demarcated the distinction between the considerations which guide the grant of anticipatory bail and regular bail. It stated that in Pokar Ram vs. State of Rajasthan (1985) 2 SCC 597 , while setting aside an order granting anticipatory bail, this Court observed that the relevant considerations governing the court's decision in granting anticipatory bail under Section 438 are materially different from those when an application for bail by a person who is arrested in the course of investigation as also by a person who is convicted and his appeal is pending before the higher court and bail is sought during the pendency of the appeal. Three situations in which the question of granting or refusing to grant bail would arise, materially and substantially differ from each other and the relevant considerations on which the courts would exercise its discretion, one way or the other, are substantially different from each other. It further stated that the judgement of the Constitution Bench in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565 in para 31, Chandrachud, C.J. clearly drew the distinction between the relevant considerations while examining an application for anticipatory bail and an application for bail after arrest during investigation. In regard to anticipatory bail, if the proposed accusation appears to stem not from motives of furthering the ends of justice but from some ulterior motive, the object being to injure and humiliate the applicant by having him arrested, a direction for the release of the applicant on bail in the event of his arrest would generally be made. It was observed that "it cannot be laid down as an inexorable rule that anticipatory bail cannot be granted unless the proposed accusation appears to be actuated by mala fides; and, equally, that anticipatory bail must be granted if there is no fear that the applicant will abscond". Some of the relevant considerations which govern the discretion, noticed therein are "the nature and seriousness of the proposed charges, the context of the events likely to lead to the making of the charges, a reasonable possibility of the applicant's presence not being secured at the trial, a reasonable apprehension that witnesses will be tampered with and 'the larger interests of the public or the State', are some of the considerations which the court has to keep in mind while deciding an application for anticipatory bail".

Smt Reena v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ayyub vs State of Up

Saddam Alias Mohammad Saddam Husain vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Sakir vs State of Up

Smt Reena v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ayyub vs State of Up

Saddam Alias Mohammad Saddam Husain vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Sakir vs State of Up

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Kishor Ram vs State of Up and Another