KM. HEMA MISHRA versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

KM. HEMA MISHRA versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

In Uttar Pradesh, the statutory right to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC is unavailable; therefore, parties aggrieved by FIRs or charge sheets may approach the High Court under Article 226 for quashing, but the grounds for such relief are distinct from those for bail. Interim protection from arrest cannot be routinely granted upon dismissal of a writ challenging an FIR, and any exceptional intervention by the High Court under Article 226 to grant pre-arrest protection must be sparingly exercised only in cases of manifest injustice or risk of gross miscarriage of justice.

Parties
Appellant: Km. Hema Mishra; Respondents: State of U.P. and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
16 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Order of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Dismissing Writ Petition Seeking Quashing of FIR and Interim Protection From Arrest
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Anticipatory Bail, Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226, Quashing of FIR, Personal Liberty Under Article 21, Criminal Procedure Arrest and Bail
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Anticipatory Bail Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226 Quashing of FIR Personal Liberty Under Article 21 Criminal Procedure Arrest and Bail

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Km. Hema Mishra

Appellant

State of U.P. and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Order of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Dismissing Writ Petition Seeking Quashing of FIR and Interim Protection From Arrest

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC is available in Uttar Pradesh
  2. 2 Whether High Court can grant pre-arrest protection under Article 226 of the Constitution
  3. 3 Appropriate scope of High Court's powers to quash FIR or grant interim protection from arrest

Ratio Decidendi

In Uttar Pradesh, the statutory right to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC is unavailable; therefore, parties aggrieved by FIRs or charge sheets may approach the High Court under Article 226 for quashing, but the grounds for such relief are distinct from those for bail. Interim protection from arrest cannot be routinely granted upon dismissal of a writ challenging an FIR, and any exceptional intervention by the High Court under Article 226 to grant pre-arrest protection must be sparingly exercised only in cases of manifest injustice or risk of gross miscarriage of justice.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • High Court's dismissal of the writ petition upheld
  • No anticipatory bail or interim protection from arrest granted