Prateek Jain Vs State Of Up & Ors: Allahabad HC: Election Commission, Higher Courts & Government Failed To Fathom Disastrous Consequences Of Permitting Elections Amid Covid19

Court :
The Allahabad High Court

Brief :
The case shows one of thegrounds for grant ofanticipatory bail to an applicant, in this case, that is theapprehension to life in the current scenario.

Citation :
REFERENCE: Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application- 4002 of 2021

10 May 2021

Justice Siddharth

Prateek Jain(Plaintiff)
State of U.P. &Ors.(Respondent)


The following judgement deals with the grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant in the pandemic times and various guidelines were given by the Hon’ble Court related to the spreading of novel coronavirus and the resources available for combating it. Thereafter, an anticipatory bail application was allowed to the applicantby analysing the facts and circumstances of the case the apprehension to life in the current scenario is a ground for grant of anticipatory bail.


1. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant, Prateek Jain, under Section 420, Section 467,Section 468,Section 471,Section 506,Section 406 of the IPC.

2. There were allegations against the applicant that he along with other co-accused is the director of a builder company. The applicant applied for a flat being constructed by the said company and paid Rs. 3,25,000/- by cheque as the booking sum. Thereafter, he paid an aggregate sum of Rs. 27,27,875/-. Yet, the possession of the flat was not given.

3. The applicant submits that he is not the director of the said company. He is simply related with the other directors andhenceforth he has been erroneously implicated in this case. Also, submitted that on account of demonetization and the slump caused in the business of real estate the present dispute emerged. The informant has a cure under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.

4. Learned A.G.A. has gone against the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant. The apprehension of the applicant isn’t established on any material on record.Just on the basis of imaginary fear, anticipatory bail can’t be granted.

5. Due to virtual hearing, there was a connectivity issue, the Court mentioned that keeping in view the mandate of Section 438(5) of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, which requires disposal of anticipatory bail application within thirty days and furthermore considering the spread of the second wave of a novel coronavirus, the hearing of this bail application doesn’t deserve to bead journed in the bigger interest of justice.


Constitution of India

  • Section 438 of theCode of the Criminal Procedure
  • Article 14 of the Indian Constitution
  • Article 21 of the Indian Constitution


The major issue concerned in this case-

  • Whether the anticipatory bail is allowed or not?


1. The Hon’ble High Court quoted the Judgement of Apex Court in the case of Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia, etc.vs. State of Punjab, 1980 AIR 1632 that “The future is so unpredictable that no fixed criteria can be laid down for the grant or rejection of anticipatory bail of an accused by the High Court or the Court of Session”. It was held by the Apex Court that the High Court and the Session Court are capable to deal with the case as per their knowledge and experience.

2. The Hon’ble Court also mentioned that “Extraordinary times require extraordinary remedy and desperate times require remedial remedy. Law should be interpreted likewise”.

3. The Court referenced the words of the Apex Court while hearing the case regarding the preparation of the Government to deal with the spread of novel coronavirus has cautioned the Government toprepare itself for the third wave of the coronavirus which may come.

4. The Hon’ble Court said that now the situation has arisen which calls for the protection of an accused from infection of novel coronavirus and death till the police investigation and, if required, the trial is concluded against him. The State lacks preparation and resources at present for dealing with the same.

5. Taking into account the above facts and circumstances and in the wake of tracking down that the apprehension to life in the current situation is a ground for grant of anticipatory bail to an accused, this Court hereby directs that the applicant, incase of the arrest, will be enlarged on anticipatory bail for the limited period that is till 03 January, 2022 with certain terms and conditions which applicant need to follow.


The Hon’ble Court observed that the anticipatory bail application is being allowed on account of special conditions and on special grounds. Therefore, anticipatory bail is allowed in this case.

Click here to download the original copy of the judgement


"Loved reading this piece by sneha jaiswal?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Click here to join our Telegram group.

sneha jaiswal
on 13 May 2021
Published in Others
Views : 553

 Recent Comments

Total: 0



Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query
Muslim Personal Law     |    x