Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 162638 (ALL)

SHYAM SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND 2 OTHERS

ABAIL/979/2025 · 2025-09-09

Subhash Vidyarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 979 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Ganga Prasad Mishra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, Sri S.P. Singh, the learned State Counsel and Sri Ambrish Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel for the complainant 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No.551 of 2020 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 308, 452 IPC registered at Police Station- Kotwali Ayodhya, District- Ayodhya. 3. Learned counsel for the complainant has raised a preliminary objection that the applicant has approached this Court by concealing the relevant fact that earlier he has filed an Application u/S 482 No.3023 of 2022 which was disposed of by means of an order dated 24.05.2022 after recording that the learned counsel for the petitioners may be permitted to surrender and apply for bail before the trial Court and the same may be decided in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satendra Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.:(2022) 10 SCC 51. 4. Accepting this submission, this Court had disposed of the Application u/S 482 Cr.P.C. permitting the petitioners to surrender before the trial court within fifteen days and file an application for Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ganga Prasad Mishra, Abhinav Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ambrish Kumar Pandey Shyam Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) their release on bail. However, there is no mention of this fact in the anticipatory bail application and the applicant has not appeared before the trial Court applied for bail in compliance of the order dated 24.05.2022. 5. Confronted with this situation, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not want to press the anticipatory bail application. 6. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is dismissed as not pressed. September 9, 2025 -Amit K- ABAIL No. 979 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench