Disposed¶8

Jaswant v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 May 2025NABAIL/3374/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Court No. 69), Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:73642, decided 7.5.2025 by Vivek Varma, J. Anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS refused in Case Crime No. 10 of 2025, Section 74 B.N.S., P.S. Kemri, District Rampur. Key point: for offences punishable up to seven years, arrest is governed by the specific protection in Section 35 B.N.S.S.; accused cannot be arrested until the Investigating Officer complies with Section 35 B.N.S.S., hence anticipatory bail unnecessary. Applicant: Jaswant (counsel Rohit Sharan Tomar); State of U.P. represented by G.A. and Sri Rajshekhar Srivastava, learned AGA. No precedents cited or discussed.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; prayer for anticipatory bail refused. ¶8

Jaswant Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:73642

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3374 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Jaswant Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Sharan Tomar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajshekhar Srivastava, learned AGA for the State, and perused the material on record.

¶7

This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 10 of 2025, under Section 74 B.N.S., Police Station Kemri, District- Rampur.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the investigation is pending in the matter. A prima facie case is made out. Referring to the provisions of Section 35 B.N.S.S. it is submitted that since offences levelled in the first information report are punishable up to seven years only, the applicant cannot be arrested. An apprehension of arrest shown in the anticipatory bail is not genuine. Thus prayer has been made for rejection of anticipatory bail.

¶10

I have considered the rival submissions raised by learned counsel for the parties.

¶11

In the matter, it is evident from the record that anticipatory bail has been moved for the offences in which the maximum punishment is seven years. There is a specific provision under Section 35 B.N.S.S. on point of arrest of the accused relating to the offences punishable up to seven years. Until and unless the mandate given in Section 35 B.N.S.S. is complied by the

¶12

Investigating Officer, accused of such offences cannot be arrested.

¶13

Thus keeping in view the statutory provisions on point of arrest of the accused, the Court is of the opinion that there is no need of anticipatory bail as the applicant cannot be arrested without complying with the provisions given in Section 35 B.N.S.S.. Specific provisions under Section 35 B.N.S.S. have been provided giving protection to the accused persons for arrest of offences punishable up to seven years punishment. Thus, prayer made in the present application is refused.

¶14

With the above observations, the present application stands disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 7.5.2025 SKT/-

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jaswant v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaswant v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases