Smt. Sunita And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another
2021 Latest Caselaw 6002 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 89
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11311 of 2021
 

 
Applicant :- Smt. Sunita And 3 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Kumar Mishra
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sunil Kumar Tiwari
 

 
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

Heard Mr. Jitendra Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, who is available on audio link, Mr. Prashant Kumar, learned A.G.A. assisted by Mr. P.K. Sahai, learned brief holder for the State.

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicant in connection with Case Crime No. 49 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 354-A, 504, 506, 307 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Muzaffarnagar.

Learned A.G.A. has invited attention of the Court to the statement of the first informant as recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. On the basis of the above, it is urged that the prosecution story as unfolded in the FIR has been fully substantiated by the statement of the first informant.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of material brought on record as well as complicity of accused and also judgment of the Apex Court in the case of P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, AIR 2019 SC 4198, this Court does not find any exceptional ground to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the present application for anticipatory bail is rejected.

Order Date :- 3.6.2021

SA