MANISH YADAV Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ramesh Chandra Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

(2.) By means of present anticipatory bail application, the applicant has shown his apprehension of arrest in Case Crime No. 240 of 2021 u/s 147, 323,354,504, 506, 376 I.P.C., P.S, Shadiyabad, District Ghazipur. Learned counsel has submitted that the applicant

(3.) The attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the present applicant is not named and no allegation of any kind whatsoever has been leveled against him. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that having ulterior motive and extraneous design in her mind the informant has deliberately and intentionally not named the present applicant in the F.I.R. as she has stated herself as wife of the present applicant. At the time of lodging of F.I.R. she has given impression that she is wife of the present applicant.