Sohit Kumar vs State of U. P. - 2023 Supreme(All) 79

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(All) 79

MANJU RANI CHAUHAN
Sohit Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicants : Gaurav Kakkar.
For the Opposite Parties : Manoj Kumar Tripathi, Vinod Kumar Tirpathi.

JUDGMENT :

[Manju Rani Chauhan, J.]

1. Heard Mr. Gaurav Kakkar, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Manoj Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in S.T. No.145 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 840 of 2021, under Sections 452, 354, 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2) (V)a, 3(1)r and 3(1)s of S.C./S.T. Act, P.S.-Kotwali Shahar, District-Bijnor, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail.

3. A preliminary objection for admissibility of jurisdiction of the aforesaid bail application vide concurrent jurisdiction enshrined in Section 438 of Cr.P.C. has been raised by learned counsel for the opposite parties.

4. While answering the preliminary objection, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that there can be no absolute bar against grant of anticipatory bail in cases under the SC/ST Act if no prima facie case is made out or where on judicial scrutiny the complaint is found to be prima facie mala fide. As per the settled law of the Apex Court passed in case of Prathvi