Akshay Dwivedi v. State of U.P & Anr.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present anticipatory bail application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 478 of 2022, under Sections 211, 195, 147, 149, 504, 506, 120B, 35 I.P.C. and 66C I.T. Act, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. It has further been submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedents. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co- operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail.

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, no case for anticipatory bail is made out.