Mahesh Tiwari @ Hemu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Court No. - 16 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2722 of 2023 Applicant :- Mahesh Tiwari @ Hemu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Durgesh Kumar Awasthi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶1Heard Sri Durgesh Kumar Awasthi, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Gyanendra Singh, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records.

¶2The instant application has been filed by the applicants seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No. 289 of 2023, under Sections 386, 506 IPC, Police Station Ram Nagar, District Barabanki.

¶3The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged on 27.05.2023 against four persons, not including the applicant, alleging that the informant runs commercial vehicles. No taxi stand is in operation in Ram Nagar, still the accused persons illegally extract Rs. 20/- per vehicle and in case, the money is not paid, the accused persons and their accomplishes threaten to assault and kill the persons.

¶4In the affidavit filed in support of the application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to old animosity. However, the reason and basis of the animosity has not been disclosed in the affidavit filed in support of the application. The applicant has been implicated on the basis of statement of the first informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., wherein he stated that he came to know the name of other accused persons, including the applicant, on making further inquiries.

¶5The named accused persons have stated in their statements that the applicant and other persons were also involved with them in extraction of money from vehicle driver in case driver resists, they forcibly alight the passengers from the vehicle.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicant has stressed that there is no allegation that the applicant had ever extracted any money from the informant.

¶7Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of allegations, which is of illegal extraction of amounts from poor drivers of passenger vehicles; that the aforesaid offence carries a maximum sentence of imprisonment upto 10 years and that as per the statement made by the learned counsel for the applicant, some other accused persons have been granted regular bail, I am of the view that there is no ground to grant pre arrest bail to the applicant.

¶8The anticipatory bail application is rejected accordingly. Order Date :- 28.11.2023 Pradeep/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench