Allahabad High Court
Bunty Alias Ashish Raj vs State Of U.P. on 2 September, 2022
Author: Suresh Kumar Gupta
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 71 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6360 of 2022 Applicant :- Bunty Alias Ashish Raj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vidhu Bhushan Singh,Rudra Pratap Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by the counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in Case Crime No. 94 of 2022, under Sections 147/148/307/336/171(ga) IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Mainpuri.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that in the alleged incident, no one has got injury from the informant's side. This is of no injury case. Thus, no offence is made out against the applicant. Only due to political rivalry, the false and frivolous FIR was lodged against the applicant. It is further submitted that although, the applicant has criminal history of 18 cases which have been clearly explained in the supplementary affidavit. The co-accused namely, Raj Kumar @ Raju Yadav who had criminal history of 12 cases has already been granted anticipatory bail till filing of police report U/s 173(2) CrPC by this Court in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 4242 of 2022. Thus, the present applicant is also entitled for anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that the role of the applicant is distinguishable from the other co-accused persons. The applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation.
Learned AGA opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that apart from this case, there is criminal history of 18 cases against the applicant which are as follows:
(i) Case Crime No. 1349 of 2007, U/s 147/149/332/353/504/506 IPC at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mainpuri.
(ii) Case Crime No. 2938 of 2007, U/s 110G CrPC at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mainpuri.
(iii) Case Crime No. 623 of 2007, U/s 3(i) U.P. Gunda Act at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mainpuri.
(iv) Case Crime No. 1416 of 2007, U/s 3(i) U.P. Gunda Act at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mainpuri.
(v) Case Crime No. 235 of 2007, U/s 332/353/379 IPC at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mainpuri.
(vi) Case Crime No. 1221 of 2007, U/s 110G CrPC at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mainpuri.
(vii) Case Crime No. 1241 of 2008, U/s 3(i) U.P. Gunda Act at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mainpuri.
(viii) Case Crime No. 1058 of 2009, U/s 110G CrPC at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mainpuri.
(ix) Case Crime No. 877 of 2011, U/s 3(i) U.P. Gunda Act at Police Station- Kisani, District- Mainpuri.
(x) Case Crime No. 869 of 2012, U/s 272/420/467/468/471 IPC and 60(2)/63 Excise Act at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mainpuri.
(xi) Case Crime No. 198 of 2013, U/s 60/73 Excise Act at Police Station- Ghiror, District- Mainpuri.
(xii) Case Crime No. 216 of 2017, U/s 147/148/323/394/427/504/506 IPC at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mainpuri.
(xiii) Case Crime No. 403 of 2017, U/s 394 IPC at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mainpuri.
(xiv) Case Crime No. 394 of 2017, U/s 420/467/468/471/272 IPC and 60/72 Excise Act at Police Station- Kisani, District- Mainpuri.
(xv) Case Crime No. 315 of 2018, U/s 147/323/332/353/504 IPC and 3(i) C.D. SC/ST Act at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mainpuri. (xvi) Case Crime No. 336 of 2018, U/s 2/3 Gangster Act at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mainpuri. (xvii) Case Crime No. 296 of 2019, U/s 395/397/504 IPC at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mainpuri. (xviii) Case Crime No. 36 of 2020, U/s 60/72 Excise Act at Police Station- Dannahar, District- Mainpuri.
Learned AGA submits that the offence is serious in nature and on the basis of aforesaid criminal history of the applicant, this application is liable to be rejected.
Considering the aforesaid facts, this is not a fit case for anticipatory bail and is hereby refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicant appears before the court below and applies for bail, then his bail application shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law propounded by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021. In this case Hon'ble the Apex Court has already laid down guidelines for grant of bail, without fettering the discretion of the courts concerned and the statutory provisions governing consideration in grant of bail, no specific directions need be issued by this Court as it is expected that the court concerned will take into consideration the necessary guidelines already issued by the Apex Court.
With these observations/directions, this application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 2.9.2022 Shravan