Disposed

Ritesh Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 May 2019A482/31171/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal Miscellaneous Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the court refused the petition to quash summoning orders and criminal proceedings. However, noting the offences are punishable only up to seven years imprisonment, the court issued directions for same-day bail consideration and a stay on coercive action for 60 days.

What did the court decide?

The application to quash was refused; bail to be considered on same day; coercive action restrained for 60 days.

Ritesh Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 31171 of 2016 Applicant :- Ritesh Kumar And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Om Prakash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶4

List has been revised. Learned counsel for the applicants is not present to argue the case.

¶5

Heard Sri Deepak Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and learned A.G.A., for the State of U.P.

¶6

This application U/s 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated 30.6.2016 passed by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 1, Kanpur Nagar as well as proceedings of Complaint Case No. 51 of 2016 (Smt. Abha Mishra Vs. Ritesh Kumar and others) under Section 406 IPC, Police Station Naubasta, District Kanpur Nagar pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 5, Agra.

¶7

Learned A.G.A., as well as learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2, contended that there is no illegality in the impugned order.

¶8

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants.

¶9

In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the impugned order as well as proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused.

¶10

However, none of the aforesaid offences against applicants is 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.

¶11

In view of order passed by this Court in the case of Smt. Sakeena and others Vs. State, and another reported in 2018 (2) ACR 2190 , it is directed that in case the applicants file their bail application, prayer for 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.

¶12

For a period of 60 days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 8.5.2019 Jaswant

Ritesh Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritesh Kumar and 2 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Dhupa Devi and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dhan Singh Vs State of Up and 2 Others

Jagannath Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nilay Kumar Pandey and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt.Geeta Devi and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another

Ganesh and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another