Disposed

Bharat Bhushan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2018A482/20471/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed the laches objection regarding an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed to challenge a summoning order in a drugs case. It directed the lower court to stay the execution of a non-bailable warrant until July 30, 2018, and to expeditiously consider the applicant's bail application, referencing Brahm Singh. Default would lead to recall.

What did the court decide?

Execution of N.B.W. stayed till 30.07.2018; bail application to be considered expeditiously on appearance.

Bharat Bhushan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20471 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Bharat Bhushan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Adesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Adesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed the challenging the summoning order dated 17.05.2016 passed by the Special Judge (Drugs Act), Meerut in Complaint Case No. 114 of 2016 (State Vs. Bharat Bhushan) under Sections 14/27 Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940, Police Station-Bhawanpur, District-Meerut as well as the entire proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case.

¶7

This application has been filed after an expiry of a period of more than two years from the date of passing of the summoning order dated 17.05.2016. Therefore, prima facie, the present application is barred by laches. The laches in filing the present application has been explained in paragraph 6 of the affidavit. The explanation so offered is sufficiant. Accordingly, the laches in filing the present criminal misc. application are hereby ignored.

¶8

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the interest of justice shall be served in case a direction is issued to the court below to consider the bail application of the applicant expeditiously.

¶9

Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant and upon perusal of the record, the Court finds that the nonbailable warrant has been issued against the applicant on 07.05.2018. Therefore, in view of the facts as noted above, it is directed that the execution of the non-bailable warrant issued against the applicant shall be kept in abeyance till 30.07.2018. In case the applicant appears before the court below on or before 30.07.2018, his bail application shall be considered by the court below in the light of the observation made by the this Court in the case of Brahm Singh and Ors. Vs. State of U.P. and others, reported in

¶10

2016 (7) ADJ 151.

¶11

However in case of default, the interim protection granted to the applicant as well as the direction for consideration of the bail application expeditiously shall stand recalled. With the aforesaid observations, the present application is finally disposed of. Order Date :- 16.7.2018 YK

Bharat Bhushan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharat Bhushan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Asp Construction and Builders Private Limited and another Vs State of U.P. and another

Sudha Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Alok Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Rajni Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Satyawati Vs State of U.P. and Another