Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.
Anup Kumar Singh – Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. and Another – Respondents
Application U/s 482 No. 4302 of 2023
Decided On : 16-02-2023
Anticipatory Bail - Criminal Procedure - Sections 419, 420, 468, 471 I.P.C. - [419, 420, 468, 471 I.P.C.] - The court discussed the maintainability of the application, concealment of material facts, and the merit of the impugned order. The court found that the applicant concealed facts and filed a false affidavit, and made a mockery of the orders of the lower court by avoiding the process of summon, bailable warrant, non-bailable warrant, and the proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. The court dismissed the application with a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by the applicant to the High Court Legal Services Authority, Allahabad within a month from the date of the order.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the impugned order dated 5th January, 2023, which cancelled the anticipatory bail earlier granted to the applicant. The court found that the applicant concealed material facts and filed a false affidavit.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant concealed facts and filed a false affidavit, and made a mockery of the orders of the lower court by avoiding the process of summon, bailable warrant, non-bailable warrant, and the proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. The court dismissed the application with a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by the applicant to the High Court Legal Services Authority, Allahabad within a month from the date of the order.
Issues: The issues involved in the case were the maintainability of the application, concealment of material facts, and the merit of the impugned order.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the applicant, who concealed facts and filed a false affidavit, and made a mockery of the orders of the lower court by avoiding the process of summon, bailable warrant, non-bailable warrant, and the proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C., is not entitled to get leniency, mercy, and justice from the Court which exercises inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the application with a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by the applicant to the High Court Legal Services Authority, Allahabad within a month from the date of the order.
JUDGMENT :
1. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicant for the following relief:
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this application and quash the impugned order dated 05/01/2023 passed by District and Session Judge Mirzapur and cancelled the Anticipatory bail Application No. 529/2022 Surendra Kumar V/S Anup Kumar Singh in case crime no. 30/2021 U/S 419, 420, 467, 471 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali Katra, District Mirzapur, against the applicant and It is also restore the Anticipatory bail, which has already been granted vide dated 15/09/2022 in case crime no. 30/2021 U/S 419, 420, 467, 471 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali Katra, District- Mirzapur till the disposal of the Trial.
It is also prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly pleased to stay the further proceedings in case crime no. 30/2021 U/S 419, 420, 467, 471 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali Katra, District- Mirzapur, otherwise applicant/petitioner suffer irreparable loss and injury, and/or pass such other and further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.”
2. This case is classic example of how a person, who is an accused wastes the precious time of the High Court by filing petition/application one after another; concealing the material fact as well as avoiding the process of Court like non-bailable warrant, proceedings initiated under Section 82 Cr.P.C.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Jitendra Kumar Jaiswal, learned A.G.A. for the State.
CASE OF THE APPLICANT
4. Earlier the applicant has lodged a First Information Report dated 6th March, 2020 against the opposite party no 2 which came to be registered as Case Crime No. 53 of 2020 under Sections 419, 420, 468 & 471 I.P.C. Police Station-Kotwali Katra, District-Mirzapur, a copy of which has been enclosed as Annexure No.1 to the affidavit accompanying the present application.
5. As a counter blast to the aforesaid FIR, opposite party no. 2 lodge the First Information Report on 21st February, 2021 against the applicant which was registered as case crime no. 30 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 468 and 471 I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali Katra, District-Mirzapur, a copy of which has been enclosed as Annexure No.2 to this affidavit.
6. After lodgement of the aforesaid FIR against the applicant, he moved an Anticipatory Bail Application No.1225 of 2021 which was rejected by the Sessions Judge Mirzapur vide dated 19.10.2021 by observing that no apprehension has been established in the bail application. Not being satisfied with the aforesaid order, the applicant moved an Anticipatory bail application No.4527/2022 before this Court. The said bail application has been dismissed as not pressed by this Court vide order dated 28th July, 2022. For ready reference, order dated 28th July, 2022 reads as follows:
At the very outset learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that he does not want to press this application as the applicant is willing to appear before the learned court below where the proceedings are pending consideration.
Accordingly, the present application is dismissed being not pressed.
Consigned to records.”
7. After taking some time, the applicant filed second anticipatory bail application before court below on 2nd September, 2022, which was numbered as Anticipatory bail application No. 1558/2022. This second bail application was allowed by the court below vide order dated 15th September, 2022. After obtaining the said order, the applicant was following each and every condition as mentioned in the order of court below granting anticipatory bail to the applicant.
8. It is surprising that the informant/opposite party no.2 filed a bail cancellation application before court below on 8th November, 2022, which was not pressed
The applicant, who concealed facts and filed a false affidavit, and made a mockery of the orders of the lower court by avoiding the process of summon, bailable warrant, non-bailable warrant, and the ....
(1) Anticipatory bail – If anyone is declared as an absconder/proclaimed offender in terms of Section 82 Cr.P.C., he is not entitled to relief of anticipatory bail.(2) Anticipatory bail – When an app....
The court reaffirmed that anticipatory bail can be granted in serious offences unless specifically excluded by law, and that the discretion to grant bail must consider the individual circumstances of....
If anyone is declared as an absconder/proclaimed offender in terms of Section 82 of Cr.P.C., he is not entitled to relief of anticipatory bail.
The power to grant Anticipatory Bail is available to the High Court and the Court of Sessions, even when cognizance is taken or a charge-sheet has been filed. The belief that the accused may be arres....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
