Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 145649 (ALL)

SUSHIL KUMAR MISHRA AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER

ABAIL/654/2025 · 2025-06-12

Rajeev Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35432 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 654 of 2025 Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Mishra And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Singh,Ishan Bhasin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 237 of 2014 u/s 308, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- Maholi, District- Sitapur. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case and they were not aware about the chargesheet submitted by the Investigating Officer and when the fact about the chargesheet came to the notice of the applicants, they moved application for anticipatory bail before the court below but the same was rejected. He further submits that the applicants are ready to cooperate in the investigation and they have no criminal history, hence, they are entitled for anticipatory bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicants and submits that injury report clearly reveals that left parietal bone is found fractured in the said injury of one person and two other persons also received injuries. He also submits that chargesheet was submitted in the year 2014, hence, applicants are not entitled for anticipatory bail. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the F.I.R. as well as other relevant documents, this Court is of the view that the applicants are not entitled for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. Order Date :- 12.6.2025 Raj Digitally signed by :- RAJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- RAJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench