Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 15902 of 2021 Applicant :- Roshini And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shikher Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sumit Goyal
Hon'ble Ajai Tyagi,J.
(1) Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
(2) Heard Shri Shikher Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A and perused the record.
(3) The instant application is being moved by the applicants namely, Roshini, Rajesh and Rajneesh Kumar invoking the powers of Section 438 Cr.P.C. that they has every reason to believe that they may be arrested on the accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence in connection with Case Crime no. 93 of 2020, under Sections 147, 323, 336 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Rampur Maniharan, District- Saharanpur.
(4) From the record, it is evident that the applicant has approached this Court after getting his anticipatory bail rejected from the Court of Sessions vide order dated 10.6.2021.
(5) 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.
(6) Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that first information report was registered under Sections 147, 323, 336 and 506 IPC. In this case, applicant is on bail by Court below. After investigation, Section 308 of IPC is added by the investigating officer. Cross FIR has also been registered at police station.
(7) Learned counsel for the opposite party and learned AGA has submitted that application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., was also filed by applicant which was later on withdrawn.
(8) Injury report shows the fracture of parietal bone, but it is pertinent to mention that occurrence is the same in which applicant has already been granted bail by the Court below.
(9) Thus, giving a panoramic view of the matter, the Court is not inclined to exercise its powers in favour of the applicants, and thus the present anticipatory bail application is hereby rejected with the direction if regular bail application is moved by applicant before Court below regarding added Section 308 IPC, it should be disposed of very expeditiously in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 30.9.2021 Ravi Prakash