Satish @ Ghanshyam Maurya vs State Of U.P. And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 19949 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Satish @ Ghanshyam Maurya vs State Of U.P. And Another on 30 May, 2024

Author: Deepak Verma

Bench: Deepak Verma

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:99214
 
Court No. - 75
 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4950 of 2024
 
Applicant :- Satish @ Ghanshyam Maurya
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Anup Kumar Shukla,Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicant for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No.125 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. and 6/10 of U.P. Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, P.S. Kotwali Khalilabad, District Sant Kabir Nagar.

3. At the outset of the argument, counsel for the applicant fairly conceded that applicant is proclaimed offender. Proceedings under Sections 82 Cr.P.C. are going on.

4. In view of the Hon'ble Apex Court judgment passed in State of Haryana vs. Dharamraj, 2023 SCC Online SC 1085, anticipatory bail application is not maintainable.

5. Without going into the merits of the case, in view of the Apex Court's judgment referred above, the applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court.

6. With the aforesaid observation, instant anticipatory bail application of the applicant Satish @ Ghanshyam Maurya under Sections 438 Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected.

7. However, if applicant surrenders and applies for bail before the concerned court below within two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided by the court below in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 30.5.2024

Meenu Singh