Ramayan Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 72

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 16218 of 2021

Applicant :- Ramayan Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Yadav,Sanjay Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Mishra

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

Sri Amrendra Nath Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Vinod Kumar

Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant,

learned A.G.A. for the State are present.

This anticipatory bail application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in

Case Crime No. 263 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 201,

120B IPC, P.S. Jahanaganj, District Azamgarh with the prayer that in the event

of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

At the outset, it has been pointed out that the applicant has approached this

Court directly without exhausting his remedy before the court of sessions.

The Full Bench consisting five Judges of this Court in the case of Ankit Bharti

vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020 (3) ADJ 165 (F.B.) has held that there must

be compelling or special circumstances entitling a party to directly approach the

High Court for grant of anticipatory bail.

In the instant matter, after perusing the record, this Court does not find any

compelling or special circumstances so as to approach this Court directly by

bypassing the Court of Session. Hence, without expressing any opinion on the

merits, the instant application for anticipatory bail is dismissed as not

maintainable at this stage before this Court. The applicant is given liberty to

move an appropriate application before the Court concerned in accordance with

law. In case such an application is filed, the same shall be dealt with

expeditiously, on merits in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 23.8.2022 Anand

Neutral Citation No. - 2022:AHC:131063