DHARMENDRA NATH SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER
ABAIL/458/2025 · 2025-04-29
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 136915 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 136915 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24240 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 458 of 2025 Applicant :- Dharmendra Nath Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party no.1.
2. In view of order being passed, notices to opposite party no.2 stand dispensed with.
3. First Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with regard to Case Crime no.6 of 2021 under Sections 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(da),(dha) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S. Gudamba, District Lucknow.
4. As per contents of F.I.R., allegations with regard to fabrication of documents pertaining to immovable property has been alleged.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the bail application at the very outset on ground that anticipatory bail would not be maintainable where allegations of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act have been made. He has placed reliance on judgment and order dated 30.09.2022 of coordinate Bench of this Court in Kailash v. State of U.P. rendered in Anticipatory Bail Application no.9396 of 2022. It is also submitted that applicant had earlier filed Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. bearing no.7868 of 2024 which was disposed of vide order dated 05.09.2024 granting liberty to applicant as prayed for applying for regular bail before court concerned and also for moving discharge application. Protection for a period of thirty days was also provided.
6. It appears that despite such liberty having been granted, applicant has not availed himself of same.
7. In such circumstances, this Court does not find it a fit case to interfere in anticipatory bail. He is however granted liberty to adhere to directions issued by this Court vide order dated
05.09.2024.
8. Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of finally subject to the observations made herein above. Order Date :- 29.4.2025 kvg/- Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench