Allahabad High Court
Ramesh Chandra Gupta vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 4 August, 2021
Bench: Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11356 of 2021
Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Gupta
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohit Singh,Ravi Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Learned Counsel for the applicant is present.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This is an application of the anticipatory bail given by the applicant Ramesh Chandra Gupta, in Case Crime No. 0052 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 120B I.P.C., P.S.- Ghaziabad, District- Ghaziabad.
On the previous date following order was passed on 17.6.2021:-
"None for the applicant, though link was sent to Sri Mohit Singh and Sri Ravi Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants.
Sri Janardan Prakash, learned AGA for the State takes objection to direct approach of the applicants to this Court in the light of the judgment of Five Judges Bench of this Court in case of Ankit Bharti Vs. State of U.P. and another; 2020 (3) ADJ 165 (F.B.).
As nobody is appearing for the applicants, in the interest of justice, case is adjourned.
List in the week commencing 16.08.2021."
No supplementary affidavit has been given to explain in view of the previous order. On the contrary, the learned counsel for the applicant is arguing that in the paragraph 5 of the anticipatory bail application, specific ground has been alleged. The specific ground is that one Vimal Dingra is inimical to the family of the applicant and he was trying to harass the applicant in the premises of the District Court, Ghaziabad. Therefore he directly came to this court. Another ground he is suggesting is that anticipatory bail order has already been passed by co-ordinate Bench in respect of co-accused. It is further submitted that applicant is prepared to furnish surety and bond, there is no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the evidence, therefore, applicant is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, it is pertinent to mention that both the grounds which are being alleged by him, was existing at the time of the previous direction, which was given by this Court, but no supplementary affidavit has been filed to explain the same. As such the anticipatory bail application has got no force and is liable to be rejected.
The liberty is, however, given that if any application is given before the court below and if the same is rejected, then the applicant may take recourse of the jurisdiction of this Court against that order.
Application is, accordingly, finally dismissed.
Order Date :- 4.8.2021
Shalini
