Disposed

Mahboob Ali and Mahmood Ali @ Bhoora v. State of U.P. and Anotehr

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2018A482/23031/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. regarding pending prosecution withdrawal. It directed the lower court to decide the withdrawal petition expeditiously and restrained coercive measures against the applicant for three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to lower court to dispose of withdrawal application within three months; prohibition on coercive measures against applicant.

Mahboob Ali and Mahmood Ali @ Bhoora Vs State of U.P. and… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23031 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Mahboob Ali And Mahmood Ali @ Bhoora Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anotehr Counsel for Applicant :- Imran Ullah,Mohammad Khalid Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. on behalf of State.

¶6

The present application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to decide the application under Section 321 Cr.P.C. dated 22.10.2003 in Case No. 1081 of 2018 under Section 307/34 IPC. pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 2 Amroha.

¶7

Learned counsel for applicant states that applicant had earlier challenged the entire proceedings in the criminal case by means of application under Section 482 No.2650/1999 wherein proceedings had been stayed. while the application thus remained pending, the prosecution appears to have filed an application under Section 321 Cr.P.C. dated 22.10.2003 seeking to withdraw the petition against the applicant. This application has remained pending till date.

¶8

Earlier application under section 482 Cr.P.C. No.2650/1999 filed by the applicant seeking quashing of the proceedings came to be dismissed on merits in the year 2002. However, it appears that proceedings in trial remained stayed under some wrong impression. Presently non bailable warrants have been issued against the applicant.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant states that the dismissal of earlier application under section 482 Cr.P.C. No.2650/1999 apart, the criminal prosecution cannot proceed against the applicant before disposal of the application filed by the prosecution under Section 321 Cr.P.C. dated 22.10.2003 seeking to withdraw the prosecution itself.

¶10

It has been specifically stated in para-18 of the affidavit in support of the present application that aforesaid application is pending even today.

¶11

In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the application pending. The application is disposed of with a direction that the learned court below may proceed to hear and decide the application dated 22.10.2003 filed by the prosecution to withdraw the prosecution as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of the order.

¶12

It is further provided that for a period of three months or till disposal of the application whichever is earlier, no coercive measure shall be adopted against the applicant.

¶13

Order Date :- 19.7.2018

¶14

Meenu

Mahboob Ali and Mahmood Ali @ Bhoora v. State of U.P. and Anotehr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahboob Ali and Mahmood Ali @ Bhoora v. State of U.P. and Anotehr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Daya Shankar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Arun Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. and another

Kishan @ Ramadhar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sahnawaj and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Shyam Veer Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another