Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.
Avnessh Kumar @ Abneesh Anticipatory Bail - Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. - Opposite Party
CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. NO. - 7709 OF 2020.
Decided On : 21-12-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. state's arguments against the application. (Para 2 , 3 , 7) |
| 2. details of the anticipatory bail application (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court affirmation of interim bail conditions. (Para 6) |
| 4. procedure and timeline for anticipatory bail (Para 8) |
| 5. court's reasoning on interim bail (Para 9) |
| 6. granting of anticipatory bail (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT
Subhash Vidyarthi, J.
Case called out.
2. Nobody is present on behalf of the applicants to press the application.
3. Ms. Priya Jaiswal, the learned Counsel is present on behalf of the State.
4. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.079 of 2020, under Sections 342 , 363, 366A, 504, 506 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Saidullah Nagar, District Balrampur.
5. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 28.07.2020 against two named accused persons, including the applicant alleging that the applicant had enticed away the informant's minor niece on 11.03.2020 and they dropped them back outside the village after three days. The F.I.R. has been lodged on 28.07.2020 i.e. more than four and half months after the incident.
6. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of an order dated 10.03.2021.
7. Thereafter, the State has filed a counter affidavit and the complainant has put in appearance but has not filed any counter affidavit.
8. Section 438 Cr.P.C. mandates for an application for anticipatory bail to be decided within thirty days, but none present on behalf of the applicant to press the application.
9. Learned A.G.A. did not point out any violation of the conditions of interim anticipatory bail committed by the applicant. Nothing has come to light which may persuade this court to take a view, other than the view taken at the time of granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant.
10. In view of above, the interim order dated 10.03.2021 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Anticipatory bail can be made absolute if no new violations occur and there is a significant delay in filing the application without evidence of wrongdoing.
The decision emphasized that no person is presumed guilty until proven otherwise, and considered the delay in filing the FIR and lack of concrete evidence against the applicant in granting anticipato....
The court granted anticipatory bail, emphasizing the applicant's cooperation and lack of substantial evidence against him, while imposing strict conditions to ensure compliance.
Anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC is an extraordinary remedy, granted only in exceptional circumstances, particularly when the applicant is not a proclaimed offender.
Anticipatory bail granted due to lack of evidence against the applicant, emphasizing the need for cooperation in the investigation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the applicability of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another in ....
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....
Abuse of the process of the Court by filing subsequent/successive anticipatory bail applications without justification.
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
