Dismissed

Ram Naresh Yadav and 02 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC31 Jan 2019A482/3903/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge court rejected application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings for procedural infirmities, noting no evidence was produced to show infirmity. Court granted temporary stay from coercive action if applicants surrender and apply for bail within two months.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed in final disposition; coercive action stayed for two months conditional upon surrender and bail application.

Ram Naresh Yadav and 02 Others Vs State of Up and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3903 of 2019 Applicant :- Ram Naresh Yadav And 02 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Singh Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶4

This case has been assigned by Hon'ble the Chief Justice vide order dated 31.1.2019.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 8.9.2018, stay NBW and entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 81 of 2018, Case No. 323 of 2018, under section 323,504 IPC and 3(1)DA SC/ST Act, Police Station Jaithra, District Etah.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that without evidence and without issuing summoning order, Non-bailable warrant was issued.

¶8

Learned AGA opposed and submitted that the impugned order is passed after considering whole evidence on record and is just and legal.

¶9

Record reveals that after investigation, charge sheet was submitted, cognizance was taken and process has been issued against the applicants according to law.

¶10

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that no case is made out to interfere with the impugned order. There is no infirmity or illegality in the said order. The prayer made in the application is refused.

¶11

However, it is observed that in case the applicants surrender and apply for bail within two months from today, the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P., reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 and affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P., reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) . For a period of two months from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

¶12

It is made clear that no further time shall be allowed to the applicants to surrender before the court concerned.

¶13

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of finally.

¶14

Order Date :- 31.1.2019/P.P.

Ram Naresh Yadav and 02 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Naresh Yadav and 02 Others v. State of Up 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

Neeraj Singh Vs State of U.P.

Jalaluddin @ Nanhey Tailor Vs State of U.P.

Karelal @ Kariya Vs State of U.P.

Om Prajapati Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Masoom and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another