Dismissed

Pappu Alias Ram Naresh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2024ABAIL/9325/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-paragraph order rejects an anticipatory bail application filed by applicants charged with disturbing peace and affray. The court declined bail due to the gravity of offences, nature of accusations, and prior rejection of bail for a co-accused with an identical role.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. rejected.

Pappu Alias Ram Naresh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:193257

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

*********

(Sl.No. 1)

Court No. - 53

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9325 of 2024

¶7

Applicant :- Pappu Alias Ram Naresh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶8

Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.

¶9

Heard Sri Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Anil Kumar Pandey, learned AGA for the State.

¶10

This Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicants seeking Anticipatory Bail in Case Crime No. 25 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 308, 325, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station-Eka, District- Forozabad.

¶11

As per the allegation made in the FIR, it is stated that the marriage of cousin sisters of the informant was solemnized on 22.02.2019 and about 07:30 P.M., the applicants along with other six persons armed with lathi came there and assaulted the informant and other family members as well as the grooms. In the aforesaid incident, three persons got injured grievously and were rushed to the hospital. After due investigation, charge sheet was filed in the instant case on 21.11.2020 and the trial of the case is pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Shikohabad, District Firozabad. However, it is reflected from the record that the applicants have been absconding continuously from the trial and non-bailable warrants were issued on 13.02.2024 against the accused persons. Thereafter, the applicants had filed the anticipatory bail application before the Trial Court, which has been rejected on 06.08.2024 and in the charge sheet, offence under Sections 325 and 308 IPC was added.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR was lodged with delay of one day and the basis of

¶13

medical report, the offence under Sections 325 and 308 IPC has been added, which is not supported by the medical report. It is further submitted that no specific role has been assigned to the applicants in the FIR and the applicants have no previous criminal history. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that the applicants are liable to be granted anticipatory bail.

¶14

Learned Additional Government Advocate for the State has opposed the anticipatory bail application and categorically stated that the applicants were primarily named in the FIR. The applicants along with their family members have assaulted the grooms of the cousin sisters of the informant armed with lethal weapons, which has caused grievous injuries to three persons. The case of the prosecution is being supported with the statement of injured witnesses and the other witnesses. Learned AGA further submits that on the basis of X-ray report, the injuries sustained are grievous in nature. The applicants are absconding from the trial since last four years without any reasonable cause despite the bailable warrants and non-bailable warrants were issued against the applicants. They are deliberately not joining the process of the Court and no indulgence is required in favour of the applicants. It is also submitted that the investigation of this case is going on. Learned AGA further submits that the bail application of coaccused Diwari Lal being Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. no. 5719 of 2024 has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 5.6.2024, therefore, he prays for rejection of the instant application of the applicants as well.

¶15

Having considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the allegations made in the FIR against the applicants, the gravity of offence and nature of accusation coupled with the fact that this Court has already rejected the bail application of the coaccused Diwari Lal, whose role is identical to the applicants, in my opinion, no case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants is made out.

¶16

Accordingly this application under section 438 Cr.P.C. is rejected .

¶17

Order Date :- 6.12.2024 Kirti

¶18

(Anish Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SMT KIRTI MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pappu Alias Ram Naresh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu Alias Ram Naresh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shakuntala Chaurasiya and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Vivek Kumar Dubey vs State of U.P. and Another

Bijendra Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Mamta and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Siyajanki and 2 Others vs Sri Awadhesh and 2 Others

Smt Neeta Kushwaha and 4 Others vs Sri Santosh Singh and 2 Others