SHIV KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO
NABAIL/55/2025 · 2025-02-17
Shree Prakash Singh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 118564 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 118564 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10271 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 55 of 2025 Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar,Ajay Deep Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No. 1104 of 2024, under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 352, 351(3), 319(2), 61(2) of BNS, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki. From perusal of the allegation in the First Information Report as well as the record appended therein, it transpires that an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- of a poor lady has been misappropriated while committing cheat and fraud and there is documentary evidence as she is having Sukanya Policy. The matter pertains to the economic offences, which is the class apart. This court is also aware of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of P. Chidambram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, reported in (2019) 9 Supreme Court Cases, 24, wherein it has been held that cases of economic offences are of different class, as they affect the economic fabric of the society and therefore, the power under section 438 of the Cr.P.C., be exercised sparingly and in such matters, the bail must be granted in exceptional cases, after application of mind in relation to nature and gravity of accusation, possibility of applicant fleeing justice and other factors.
Learned counsel for the applicant has failed to satisfactorily substantiate that the applicant would not tamper the evidences and would not threaten the witnesses and the apprehension of arrest has also been denied. Accordingly, this court do not find any good ground to intervene in this matter. The anticipatory bail application is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 17.2.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench