Disposed

Santosh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Feb 2018A482/4633/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court was approached under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a non-bailable warrant. Instead of quashing, the court admitted that proceedings should be pending and granted a 30-day window for the applicants to appear before the lower court to seek bail, during which no coercive action would be taken.

What did the court decide?

Applicants directed to appear for bail applications within 30 days; no coercive action during this period.

Santosh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4633 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Santosh And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ganesh Mani Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. in opposition.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashment of the non- bailable warrant order dated 01.11.2017 in Complaint Case No.3488 of 2014 (Kavita Devi Katheriya Vs. Santosh and others), under Sections 452, 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Vidhnu, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate- 3, Kanpur Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have neither deliberately avoided to attend the court below nor they had any intention to delay the trial. However, he made promise, as has been extended on behalf of the applicants, that as a matter of last chance, they may be permitted to appear/surrender before the court below as they are ready to give an undertaking that they will always appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶8

Learned AGA has supported the proceedings of the lower court and submitted that there is no good ground for quashment of the proceedings. He adds that court below has rightly issued the nonbailable warrant against the applicants, but he conceded that if, applicants make promise to surrender before the court below within the stipulated period, then Court may give some time for their surrendering before the court below.

¶9

In view of above facts and circumstances of the case, as a matter of last opportunity, applicants are directed to appear before the court concerned within a period of 30 days from today and apply for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of by the courts below in accordance with law.

¶10

Till the period of 30 days from today no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. It is made clear that in case no such application is moved within the time prescribed, the trial court would be at liberty to proceed further with the case in accordance with law.

¶11

With the above directions/observations, this application is finally disposed of.

¶12

Order Date :- 13.2.2018

¶13

Raj

Santosh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh and 4 Others 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Vs State of U.P. and Another

Asha Ram and Others Vs State of U.P.

Sameer Ansari Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ashish Kumar Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Manju Ashiwal and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mahesh Chandra and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another