Court No. - 80

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL

APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8581 of 2022

Applicant :- Ramu @ Ram Pratap Singh

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Akash Deep Srivastava

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Om Prakash Tripathi,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for

the State.

Apprehending his arrest, applicant has moved present

application for anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in Case

Crime No.278 of 2019, under Sections 420, 411 IPC, Police

Station Maharajpur, District Kanpur Nagar.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is not

named in the FIR. Abhimanyu Singh was arrested on the spot.

The name of applicant surfaced in the confessional statement of

co-accused Abhimanyu Singh. Abhimanyu Singh has been

granted bail by this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail

Application No.43019 of 2019 vide order dated 19.10.2019.

One co-accused Mukesh Sharma has also granted interim

anticipatory bail by this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail

Application No.58034 of 2019 vide order dated 03.01.2020. It

is submitted that applicant has been shown as fled from the spot

and nothing has been recovered from the possession of the

applicant. It is also submitted that after moving anticipatory bail

application, process of 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the

applicant. So, the aforesaid process will not apply in this case.

Entire case of prosecution is mala fide with intention to harass

the applicant, accusation of the applicant is with the object of

humiliation. It is also submitted that punishment provided in the

said Sections is up to 7 years. Arrest of the applicant is not

warranted. Applicant shall cooperate with the investigation/trial

proceeding, therefore, protection may be given in favour of the

applicant.

Learned AGA objected the anticipatory bail application and

submitted that apprehension of arrest of the applicant is not

based on concrete/reasonable grounds but conceded that the

punishment provided for the said offences is up to 7 years

charge sheet has not been filed. Anticipatory bail application

lacks merit and is liable to be rejected.

The Sections in which FIR/charge sheet has been filed,

punishment is up to 7 years, therefore, it is expected from the

learned court below to abide by the law propounded by the

Apex Court. Law propounded by the Apex Court is the law of

the land and everyone is duty bound to follow such law in its

letter and spirit.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no

need to pass any order granting anticipatory bail as prima facie

it appears that there is no apprehension of arrest of the present

applicant as law laid down in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs.

State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273.

However, applicant shall move regular bail application before

the court concerned within 15 days from today the same shall

be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the court below in

view of the law laid down in the case of Satender Kumar

Antil vs. CBI and others, Special Leave to Appeal

(Criminal) No.5191 of 2021, Siddharth vs. The State of

Uttar Pradesh & Anr., Criminal Appeal No.838 of 2021 and

Aman Preet Singh vs. CBI through Director, Criminal

Appeal No.929 of 2021.

The instant anticipatory bail application is disposed of in the

aforesaid terms.

Order Date :- 9.9.2022

Priya

Digitally signed by PRIYA

KUSHWAHA

Date: 2022.09.09 14:09:31 IST

Reason:

Location: High Court of Judicature at

Allahabad