Dismissed

Subedar Rao v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC23 May 2025ABAIL/567/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge court dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed by Subedar Rao in a cheating and forgery case. The court refused relief, citing the applicant's non-cooperation in investigation and the issuance of a non-bailable warrant under Section 82 Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file regular bail; anticipatory bail application dismissed.

Subedar Rao vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:30850

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 567 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Subedar Rao Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA appearing on behalf of State. In view of order being passed, notice to opposite party no.2 stands dispensed with.

¶7

This first anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No. 235 of 2022 under Sections 406, 420, 506, 467, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code, P.S. Hazratganj, District Lucknow.

¶8

As per contents of FIR, allegations levelled against applicant as well as co-accused is that they deceived the informant to invest a substantial amount of money on the false pretext of providing Government employment.

¶9

At the very outset, learned A.G.A. has submitted that applicant is not co-operating in the investigation due to which non-bailable warrant as well as process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against applicant.

¶10

Learned counsel for informant, however, submits that applicant had earlier sought to record his statement by means of an affidavit which was submitted to the Investigating Officer. It is submitted that co-accused against whom primary gist of allegations has been levelled have already been granted regular bail.

¶11

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, it appears that the applicant is not co-operating in the investigation due to which non-bailable warrant as well as process Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against him.

¶12

In such circumstances, this Court does not find any good ground to grant any indulgence with regard to anticipatory bail.

¶13

However, liberty is granted to the applicant to file a regular bail before the Court concerned.

¶14

The application stands disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 23.5.2025 Satish

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Subedar Rao v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subedar Rao v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shebu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Dheeraj Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Genda Lal and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Finance Deptt. of U.P. Lko and 3 Others

Anjani Kumar Kaushal vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Bikash Tharu vs State of U.P. Thru. Principal Secy. Home Lko.

Buddhesh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru Principal Sec. Home