Dismissed

Nishant Kushwaha @ Sharad and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC5 Jun 2018A482/20543/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought quashing of an order issuing non-bailable warrants under Section 482 Cr.P.C., citing lack of summons service. The court refused to quash proceedings for lack of summons issues but directed that bail applications be decided within 30 days without interim or coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Direction that bail applications be decided within 30 days; no coercive action for said period.

Nishant Kushwaha @ Sharad and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 54

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20543 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Nishant Kushwaha @ Sharad And 2 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- J.B. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A., for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 21.5.2018 passed by learned Civil Judge (S.D.)/F.T.C., Gautam Budh Nagar in Case No. 5505 of 2017 arising out of case crime no. 128 of 2015 under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Gautambudh Nagar whereby non bailable warrants have issued against the applicants.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants contended that applicants have no knowledge about the proceedings of the trial court. On 21.5.2018, non bailable warrants have been issued against the applicants without service of summons. He further contended that during investigation, applicants were not arrested by the police.

¶8

Learned A.G.A., contended that there is no illegality in the impugned order passed by the learned trial court.

¶9

Service of summons cannot be decided by this Court under extraordinary jurisdiction of the Court.

¶10

In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the impugned order passed in the aforesaid case is refused.

¶11

However, none of the aforesaid offences against applicants are punishable with imprisonment for more than seven years. All the materials relevant for disposal of bail application is available on record before trial court/court concerned.

¶12

In view of order passed by this Court on 23.01.2018 in Application under Section 482 No. 43217 of 2017 (Smt. Sakeena and others Vs. State) and as per direction of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajesh Sharma and others Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in 2017 0 AIR (SC) 3869 , it is directed that in case the applicants file their bail application, prayer for their bail shall be considered and decided on the same day. If for any reason it is not possible to decide the regular bail application on the same day, then prayer for interim bail shall be considered and decided on the same day.

¶13

For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against applicants.

¶14

With the above directions, this application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 5.6.2018 Jaswant

Nishant Kushwaha @ Sharad and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nishant Kushwaha @ Sharad and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rashid Beg and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pushpa Devi and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajveer and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Shruti Maheshwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sher Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shakeel Khan and 5 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another