Court No. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 19248 of 2021 Applicant :- Ram Chandra Sharma And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Tej Kulshrestha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard over anticipatory bail application, under Section 438 Cr.P.C., moved by the applicants- Ram Chandra Sharma and Arjun Dev Varshney, in Case Crime No. 190 of 2020, under Sections-354-B, 356, 506 I.P.C. Police Station-Gandhi Park, District-Aligarh.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicants are innocent; they have been falsely implicated in this very case crime number; application for anticipatory bail was moved before court of session where it was rejected; there is every likelihood of arrest by the police; hence this application for anticipatory bail with above prayer.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed with this contention that there is no likelihood of arrest by the police, where offences, maximum punishable upto seven years, are to be dealt with as per Section 41 Cr.P.C., as well as law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC), Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Having heard and gone through material placed on record as well as considering all those facts and circumstances of the case and law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the Case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98, no indulgence for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.
However, in case, applicants approaches before the trial court with bail application, same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law cited as above as well as in strict adherence of provision of Section 41 Cr.P.C.
With the aforesaid observations, this anticipatory bail application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 23.12.2021 Deepak/