Haroon vs State Of U.P.
2022 Latest Caselaw 3390 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 80
 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3019 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Haroon
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Suneel Kumar Mishra
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicant in connection with Case Crime No. 0291 of 2021, under Sections 407, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Shahjad Nagar, District Rampur.

Main substratum of argument of learned counsel for applicant is that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and charge-sheet has been submitted by the Investigating officer against the applicant without conducting fair investigation.

Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the state of U.P. opposed the prayer for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant by contending that investigating officer after due investigation submitted charge sheet dated 11.03.2022 in this case on the basis of cogent material against the applicant, therefore as on date cognizable offence is made out against the applicant and it can not be presumed that he has been falsely implicated.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of material brought on record as well as complicity of accused-applicant 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. in favour of the applicant.

Accordingly, the instant application for anticipatory bail is rejected.

Order Date :- 18.5.2022

Saurabh