Allahabad High Court
Dashrath Nath Shukla vs State Of U.P. on 18 June, 2021
Bench: Yashwant Varma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 34
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8989 of 2021
Applicant :- Dashrath Nath Shukla
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kirtikar Pande
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vikas Sahai the learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Kirtikar Pande learned counsel who has appeared for the informant and perused the record.
The instant application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in light of the apprehension of the arrest of the applicant in Case Crime No. 307 of 2018, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali District Ballia.
The Court finds no ground to accord the facility of anticipatory bail to the applicant here for reasons which are recorded hereinafter.
The instant petition emanates from a first information report which was registered as far back as on 30 July 2018. Undisputedly upon conclusion of investigation, a charge sheet in the aforesaid matter was submitted on 28 January 2019. Non Bailable Warrants were thereafter issued against the applicant on 15 February 2020.
The applicant initially sought quashing of the first information report by preferring a writ petition before this Court which was finally disposed of on 21 August 2018. While disposing of that petition the Division Bench observed that the writ petition at the behest of the present applicant would stand dismissed. The aforesaid final order was assailed by the applicant by way of Special Leave Petition which was entertained and initially an interim order was passed thereon providing that no coercive action be taken against the applicant. That order continued till the Special Leave Petition came to be dismissed on 11 March 2019 upon the Supreme Court being apprised that a charge sheet had already been filed in the matter.
The applicant thereafter preferred an Application U/S 482 No. 13350 of 2020 which too came to be dismissed by a reasoned judgment delivered on 22 February 2021. The learned Judge while dismissing the 482 application noted that the allegations of forgery were clearly made out and that no interference was warranted. It becomes pertinent to note here that although in the aforesaid 482 application no interim order operated, the applicant chose not to appear or cooperate in the trial. Learned counsel for the applicant apprises the Court that the aforesaid final order rendered on the 482 application forms subject matter of challenge in a Special Leave Petition which is pending consideration before the Supreme Court.
In light of what is noted above it is evident that it would be open to the applicant to not only challenge the proceedings in their entirety in the pending Special Leave Petition but also seek such interim protection as may be desired. Once the SLP has been preferred it would be inappropriate for this Court to entertain this anticipatory bail application in what would clearly be parallel proceedings.
The application thus stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 18.6.2021
faraz
