Allahabad High Court
Guddu Yadav vs State Of U.P. on 11 February, 2020
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1342 of 2020 Applicant :- Guddu Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Singh,Vipin Vinod Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Vipin Vinod, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This anticipatory bail application (u/s 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.225 of 2019 under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Mohammdabad, District Ghazipur, during the pendency of investigation.
As per FIR information has been received from informer that the truck of the accused-applicant was being used with wrong number plate showing registration no.UP 61 BT 4044 in plate of actual no. UP 61 AT 4440. He was using the said truck for illegal purpose.
Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated by his enemies. He is not indulging in any criminal activities nor has affixed wrong number plate. He has apprehension of imminent arrest. He has criminal history of one case being case crime no.0097 of 2019 under section 11of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, P.S. Mohammdabad, District Ghazipur, copy of the FIR has been produced which is taken on record. If released on bail he would not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the investigation.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer and has drawn the attention of the Court towards Case Crime No. 97 of 2019 under section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act in which the accused-applicant has been charge-sheeted and he was found indulging in smuggling of animals.
Looking to the fact that the applicant was found with wrong number plate being used in the truck, taking into consideration the gravity of accusation, there being criminal antecedents of the applicant and there being possibility of his fleeing from justice, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court does not find good ground for enlarging the applicant, Guddu Yadav on anticipatory bail in this case.
The anticipatory bail application of the applicant Guddu Yadav, is, accordingly, rejected.
Order Date :- 11.2.2020 AU