Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12962 of 2021 Applicant :- Mukesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Counsel for Applicant :- Lalit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Girja Shanker Mishra,Girja Shanker Mishra
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.
By means of the present application the applicant, Mukesh is seeking his anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 281 of 2021, u/s 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Tajganj, District Agra.
From the record, it is evident that the applicant has approached this Court straightaway without his anticipatory bail rejected from the Court of Session.
Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of the Court to Clause-7 of Section 438 Cr.P.C. (U.P. Act No.4 of 2021), which read thus :
"(7) If an application under this section has been made by any person to the High Court, no application by the same person shall be entertained by the Court of Session."
After interpreting the aforesaid clause it is clear that the Legislature in its wisdom bestowed two avenues open for the accused. If the accused has chosen to come to the High Court straightaway, then he would not be relegated back to exhaust her remedy before the Court of Session first.
Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A. as per Section 438(3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present FIR was got registered by one Seema against two named persons including the present applicant with the allegation that she had given a huge amount of Rs. 5,50,000/- to the applicant for purchasing a house but the applicant has neither provided her a house nor returned her money. Thereafter on 10.08.2020 the applicant had given to the informant a cheque but the same was returned back without encashment and the informant without filing a case under section 138 N.I. Act lodged the present FIR. It is further submitted that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case.
After perusing the record, the Court finds that the applicant has actively participated in the commission of the offence.
Under the circumstances, the Court feels that in order to have indepth probe into the matter, the Investigating Officer of the case should be given fullest liberty to choose its own course for the transparent investigation.
Thus, giving a panoramic view of the matter the Court is not inclined to exercise its powers in favour of the applicant, and thus the present anticipatory bail application is hereby REJECTED.
Order Date :- 28.7.2021 Nisha Digitally signed by Justice Rahul Chaturvedi Date: 2021.07.31 15:17:12 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad