Sharad Srivasatava vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 19701 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 11
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2029 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Sharad Srivasatava
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Komal Prasad Tiwari,Pushkal Shukla
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

This Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicant after rejecting his anticipatory bail application by the order dated 21.11.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Lucknow seeking Anticipatory Bail in case crime no. 171 of 2022, under sections 384, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Gomti Nagar Extension, District Lucknow.

On the matter being taken up, learned A.G.A. has pointed out that in this case, FIR was lodged on 06.07.2022 for the offence under Sections 384 and 506 IPC against the applicant and co-accused Bhawna Srivastava in which charge-sheet was submitted against them and after taking cognizance of the charge-sheet, they were summoned vide order dated 23.09.2022 to face trial. The said order was challenged by the applicant by means of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 8011 of 2022 which was disposed of vide order dated 10.11.2022 with the observation that it is needless to mention that if the applicant appears before the court below and applies for bail, the court below shall consider and decide the same expeditiously, in accordance with law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs Central Bureau of Investigation and others: MANU/SC/1024/2021, therefore, the relief sought by means of this application is not liable to be granted in view of the judgment of this Court in the case of Shivam vs. State of U.P. and another, 2021 (4) ALJ 132.

In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not want to press this application and he may be allowed to withdraw this application with liberty to comply the aforesaid order dated dated 10.11.2022.

In view of the statement made by Mr. Pushkal Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant at the Bar, the instant anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

Order Date :- 3.12.2022

saurabh