Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10316 of 2021 Applicant :- Shakir Husain @ Sahid Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Dubey,Ahtisham Hussain Hashmi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant Shakir Husain @ Sahid in Case Crime No. 156 of 2013, under section 364 I.P.C., P.S.- Allau, District - Mainpuri.
Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the in pursuance of the first information report lodged, the police investigated the matter and has already submitted the final report. Against the said final report, protest application was given, whereupon the final report was quashed and the applicant was summoned. Against the summoning order, the applicant has filed an Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. which was also dismissed. Therefore, this anticipatory bail application has been filed. Submission is that the applicant is a police constable and there is no question of his fleeing away from the judicial process, hence, he should be given the benefit of anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that applicant has no criminal history and applicants are prepared to furnish sureties and bonds.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and has submitted that the matter pertains to a crime number of the year 2013 and the summoning order has been filed by the learned Judicial Magistrate on 12.02.2015 and from the last six years, the applicant has not been arrested which shows that there is no threat of his arrest.
Considered the submissions of both the sides. Once the application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has already been dismissed, the applicant should have gone for regular bail. But even though, he was summoned by order dated 12.02.2015 and the summoning order was well within his knowledge, he did not appear before the court below. Even after dismissal of his application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., he did not appear before the court below in compliance of the summoning order, nor he gave any regular bail application before the court below. It is pertinent to mention that the anticipatory bail is not a substitute of a regular bail and for it, some extraordinary circumstances are required in comparison to regular bail. There should be some special reason for taking recourse of the provisions of anticipatory bail. There must also be a threat of arrest of the accused. The applicant has not been able to show any real threat of arrest or any extraordinary circumstances, as such, I do not find any ground for giving benefit of anticipatory bail, hence the anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant is rejected.
Regular bail application may be given before the appropriate forum and if such application is given, the court below shall consider and disposed of the bail application expeditiously and preferably on the same day in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 30.7.2021 sailesh