VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Allahabad High Court 2023 › High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Svami Kant Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Dismissed on merits/Rejected
Court
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Decided
22 December 2023
Bench
Subhash Vidyarthiauthor
Case no.
3035/2023

Judgment

Court No. - 16 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3035 of 2023 Applicant :- Svami Kant Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶1Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Misra, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Akhilesh Kumar Vyas, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records.

¶2The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.419 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420 IPC, 6/10 Public Examination Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Sultanpur.

¶3The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 29.10.2023 stating that during PET examination, the other co-accused was appearing in place of the applicant.

¶4In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail-application, it has been contended that the applicant is innocent, he has no criminal history and he has falsely been implicated in the present case.

¶5A co-accused has been granted regular bail.

¶6The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that investigation is going on, and at this stage, grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant will adversely affect the investigation.

¶7Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the applicant tried to secure public employment by making the co-accused person to write his examination paper, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts do not warrant exercise of discretion of this Court by enlarging the applicant on anticipatory bail.

¶8In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is rejected. However, in case the applicant files any bail application, the same shall be considered and decided, without being influenced by rejection of this anticipatory bail application. Order Date :- 22.12.2023 prateek High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Source: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.