NCLT: Suspended Directors Who are Prospective Resolution Applicants Cann’t Access Valuation Reports  ||  Supreme Court Clarifies Test For Granting Bail to Accused Added at Trial under Section 319 CrPC  ||  SC: Fresh Notification For Vijayawada ACB Police Station not Required After AP Bifurcation  ||  SC: Studying in a Government Institute Does Not Create an Automatic Right to a Government Job  ||  NCLT Mumbai: CIRP Claims Cannot Invoke the 12-Year Limitation Period For Enforcing Mortgage Rights  ||  NCLAT: Misnaming Guarantor as 'Director' in SARFAESI Notice Doesn't Void Guarantee Invocation  ||  Jharkhand HC: Mere Breach of Compromise Terms by an Accused Does Not Justify Bail Cancellation  ||  Cal HC: Banks Cannot Freeze a Company's Accounts Solely Due To ROC Labeling a 'Management Dispute'  ||  Rajasthan HC: Father’s Rape of His Daughter Transcends Ordinary Crime; Victim’s Testimony Suffices  ||  Delhi HC: Judge Who Reserved Judgment Must Deliver Verdict Despite Transfer; Successor Can't Rehear    

Sameer Jain vs. State Of U.P. And Another (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC:103016) - (High Court of Allahabad) (10 Jun 2024)

Anticipatory bail cannot be granted to a proclaimed offender

MANU/UP/2100/2024

Criminal

In present case, the applicant has been implicated in present case along with 15 other co-accused persons for committing the offences alleged in the FIR under different sections of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).Learned Senior counsel for the Applicant submits that number of co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bails, stay of arrest and regular bail. The offences alleged are of civil nature and engaging the attention of civil court hence, the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on anticipatory bail.

The informant / opposite party no. 2, has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application. The opposite party no. 2 has submitted that as per Section 84(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), applicant was not entitled to file any objection since it is clear from Section 84(1) of CrPC that, the same can only be filed by a person, other than the proclaimed person, on the ground that the objector has interest in such property and it is not liable to attachment under Section 83 of CrPC. He has submitted that the applicant was a proclaimed offender and he had no right to file objection under Section 84(1)(2) of CrPC.

It is clear from Section 84(1) of CrPC that, a proclaimed offender had no right to file objection under Section 84(2) of CrPC. The applicant is clearly a proclaimed offender and an absconder. In the cases of Srikant Upadhyay and Ors. vs. State of Bihar and Another, Lavesh vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and Prem Shankar Prasad vs. The State of Bihar and Another, it has been held that anticipatory bail cannot be granted to a proclaimed offender. No law to the contrary has been placed before this court by the counsel for the applicant.The interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant also stands cancelled. Anticipatory bail application is rejected.

Tags :   PROCLAIMED OFFENDER  BAIL  GRANT

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved