PRASHANT SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Rakshit Raj Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Ravi Srivastava, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, Sri Vivek Kumar Rai, the learned counsel for the informant, who has filed his Vakalatanam, which is taken on record, and perused the records.

(2.) Learned counsel for the informant has raised a preliminary objection that the applicant has approached this Court directly without filing application for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court and, therefore, the instant application should not be entertained. It has been submitted that anticipatory bail applications filed by the three co-accused persons are pending before the Sessions Court and their prayer for grant of interim protection has been rejected by the Sessions Court.

(3.) Replying to the aforesaid, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is a young person aged 21 years and is pursuing B.Tech. Course. His examinations are schedule to commence shortly and as the Sessions Court has already rejected the prayer for grant of interim protection to the three co-accused persons, the applicant has approached this Court directly in view of the aforesaid exceptional circumstances.