Allahabad High Court
Gurudeep Singh @ Gauri Sardar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home ... on 18 July, 2024
Author: Karunesh Singh Pawar
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:48590 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1536 of 2024 Applicant :- Gurudeep Singh @ Gauri Sardar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Suyesh Pradhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for respondent State.
The present application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.288/1992 under Sections 32, 302 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Sitapur.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that First Information Report in this case was lodged on 27.4.1992. Thereafter final report was submitted. He submits that no prima facie case under Section 302 Indian Penal Code is made out and in view of this contingency the anticipatory bail application would be maintainable even if Section 302 I.P.C. has been applied in this case. In support of his contention he has relied on the judgement of Deshraj Singh vs. State of U.P. and another passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.7286 of 2022.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the contention of learned counsel for the applicant. He submits that after filing of the final report the accused have been summoned under Section 302 and 328 I.P.C. From perusal of the statement of the prosecution witness, F.I.R., admission slip of Gandhi Memorial Hospital as well as postmortem report and the FSL report, it is prima facie evident that the deceased was administered poison and aluminum phosphide poison has been found in the FSL report. The statement of Satish Dwivedi as well as the complainant are intact. In view of the specific bar under Section 438 Cr.P.C. the anticipatory bail application is not maintainable as the offence is punishable with life.
Learned A.G.A has also drawn attention of the Court towards order dated 28.11.2023 contained in Annexure-20 to the bail application by which discharge application moved by the present applicant has been rejected in purported compliance of the order passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court. He submits that while rejecting the discharge application learned court below (internal page 4 of the order dated 28.11.2023) while discussing the material collected by the prosecution has held that prima facie offence under Section 302 I.P.C. is made out and therefore, the application for anticipatory bail is not maintainable.
Perused the record.
On due consideration to the judgements cited above, perusal of the statement of the prosecution witnesses as well as FSL report prima facie it cannot be said that prima facie case under Section 302 I.P.C. is not made out as also in view of the specific bar under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the anticipatory bail application is rejected.
Order Date :- 18.7.2024 Madhu