Disposed

Virendra Singh and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Oct 2019A482/24225/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought quashing of criminal proceedings concerning disputed land where the applicant held a temporary civil injunction. The court declined to quash but directed the Magistrate to hear the case expeditiously within six months without adjournments, while restraining coercive action pending trial.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Magistrate to decide the case within six months without adjournments; restrained coercive action against the applicant until trial conclusion.

Virendra Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24225 of 2009

¶3

Applicant :- Virendra Singh And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Yogendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Ajendra Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Ajendra Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. for the Staterespondent.

¶6

This Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer for quashing the proceedings of Case No.10 of 2008 arising out of Case Crime No. 12 of 2009 under Sections 198A (2) U.P.Z.A. & L. R. Act P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Etah pending before Up Ziladhikari/Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Etah.

¶7

Submission is that the applicant has filed a civil suit in respect of disputed land which is subject matter in the present complaint and in which he has been granted temporary injunction by the civil court.

¶8

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent have justified the order impugned and submitted that the order impugned does not suffers from any illegality or infirmity which may warrant any interference by this Court.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions as advanced by he counsel for the parties, the present 482 Cr.P.C. application is disposed of with the direction to learned Up Ziladhikari/Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Etah to consider and decide the Case No.10 of 2008 arising out of Case Crime No. 12 of 2009 under Sections 198-A (2) U.P.Z.A. & L. R. Act P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Etah pending before Up Ziladhikari/Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Etah, as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, after hearing the concerned parties without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, in case the proceedings of the aforesaid case is not stayed by any Court.

¶10

However, it is provided that till the disposal/conclusion of aforesaid trial, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant, provided the applicant shall cooperate with the trial.

¶11

In view of the above, this 482 Cr.P.C. application stands disposed of.

¶12

Order Date :- 22.10.2019 Dev/-

Virendra Singh and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Singh and 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

Abhinay Kumar Singh @ Rajj and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Kusumlata Goya Vs State of U.P.and Another

Naman Tripathi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nitin Agrawal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Chandra Kala and Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Yashwant Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another