Subedar Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:17539

Court No. - 82

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8987 of 2024

Applicant :- Subedar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Shekhar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed in the matter is taken on record.

¶7

This application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. has been moved on behalf of the applicant - Subedar Yadav seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 190 of 2014, under Sections 147, 308, 323 IPC, Police Station Chaubeypur, District Varanasi.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. The investigation of the case has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed and cognizance has been taken by the Court concerned. It has been submitted that in case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶11

In this matter, it reveals that after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted and cognizance has also been taken by the Court concerned. Offences levelled against the applicant are punishable with the imprisonment upto seven years. During course of investigation, notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. was given to the applicant and he has cooperated with the Investigating Officer. Though non-bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant yet he has not been declared absconder so far and no process under Sections 82 and 83 CrPC has been issued

¶12

against him by the Court concerned.

¶13

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , it has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶14

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant stated at the Bar that he is not pressing the prayer made in this application for anticipatory bail and prayed that a direction at the outset may be issued by this Hon'ble Court to consider and decide the bail application of the applicant in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825.

¶15

In view of that, the prayer made in the present application is refused.

¶16

However, it is observed that the bail application of the applicant, if moved, shall be considered and decided by the Court concerned in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825 .

¶17

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶18

Order Date :- 5.2.2025 ss

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Subedar Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subedar Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Niraj Yadav @ Niraj vs State of U.P. and Another

Amit vs State of U.P. and Another

Nitin Pandey vs State of U.P. and Another

Lochan Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Jyoti Maurya vs State of U.P. and Another

Rakesh Singh vs State of U.P. and 4 Others