Rahul Pal And Another vs State Of U.P.And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 437 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 66
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2509 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Rahul Pal And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Kumar,Rashtrapati Khare
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 

Heard Mr. Anand Kumar, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicants Rahul Pal and Ishwar Chandra Pal seeking their enlargement on bail in connection with Case Crime No.288 of 2021, under Sections 326, 504, 506 308 I.P.C., Police Station- Chopan, District- Sonbhadra.

On the matter being taken up, learned counsel for applicants submits that Rahul Pal applicant-1 has already been arrested. As such present application in respect of applicant-1 has been rendered infructuous. He, therefore submits that the present appplication for anticipatory bail in respect of applicant-1 Rahul Pal be dismissed as having rendered infructuous.

Learned A.G.A. has no objection to the same.

Accordingly, this application for anticipatory bail is dismissed as having rendered infructuous for applicant-1 Rahul Pal only.

Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant Ishwar Chandra Pal is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in aforesaid case crime crime number. Applicant has been co-operating with the investigation. As such, no coercive process has been issued against applicant Ishwar Chandra Pal. It is thus urged that custodial arrest of applicant Ishwar Chandra Pal is not absolutely necessary during course of trial. Applicant is a man of clean antecedents and has no criminal history to his credit except the present on.e However, irrespective of above, there is eminent threat of applicant being arrested. As such, liberty of applicant be protected by extending the benefit of anticipatory bail.

Per contra, the learned A.G.A. contends that occurrence has taken place as is evident from the injury report of injured. Co-accused who have been arrested, filed regular bail applications before this Court. As such, no exception can be carved-out, in case of applicant-Ishwar Chandra Pal.

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 :- 4.4.2022

Arshad