Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Kapil Dhigara vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|22 December, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 18785 of 2021 Applicant :- Kapil Dhigara Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- S.M.Ayaz Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit has been filed today. Taken on record.
2. Heard Shri S.M.Ayaz Ali, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Ankit Srivastava, learned AGA for the State.
3. This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Kapil Dhigara seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 25 of 2020, under Sections - 147, 148, 323, 452, 308 I.P.C., Police Station - Sikandra, District - Agra, during the pendency of trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, no such occurrence took place. In any case, the applicant was not involved in the same. The real dispute, if any, was with a person known to the applicant. Upon a petty quarrel having erupted, police party had intervened. The applicant was challaned. Thereafter, only by way of revenge, prosecution allegations were exaggerated on the strength of belated injury report. Further, it has been submitted, injured was admitted to the hospital from where the injury report was procured. Thus, it has been submitted, the applicant has been unnecessarily harassed and threatened with arrest.
5. On the other hand, learned AGA would submit, at present, there is nothing to doubt the occurrence. In any case, referring to the order-sheet, it has been submitted, the applicant has not shown compliance of the process of law. He has neither responded to the summons nor to the bailable warrant. At present, non-bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, other things apart, in view of the fact that the applicant has failed to respond to the process of law and non-bailable warrant has been issued against him, no ground is made to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant.
7. Accordingly, the present application is rejected, leaving it open to the applicant to apply for regular bail before the learned court below, which application when filed, may be considered on its own merits, without being prejudiced by any observation made in this order.
Order Date :- 22.12.2021 Prakhar
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Kapil Dhigara vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
22 December, 2021
Judges
  • Saumitra Dayal Singh
Advocates
  • S M Ayaz Ali