Shani Yadav And 5 Others vs State Of U.P.And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 2212 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 66
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3508 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Shani Yadav And 5 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Yadav,Shri Ram Yadav
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for applicants and learned A.G.A. for State.

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicants- Shani Yadav, Dudhnath Yadav, Roshan Yadav, Udai Yadav, Ramajha and Lallan in connection with Case Crime No.189 of 2020, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 457, 380 I.P.C., Police Station- Gambhirpur, District- Azamgarh.

At the very outset, learned A.G.A. submits that charge-sheet has been submitted against applicants on 23.12.2020 in above-mentioned case crime number. After submission of aforesaid charge-sheet, cognizance was taken by court concerned vide cognizance taking order dated 23.12.2020. However, in the entire affidavit filed in support of the present application for anticipatory bail, there is no explanation with regard to the subsequent events that have taken place after passing of the cognizance taking order dated 23.12.2020 on the charge-sheet dated 23.12.2020.

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 jurisdiction under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the present application for anticipatory bail is rejected.

Order Date :- 6.5.2022

Zafar