Disposed

Farhan @ Ashoor and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Dec 2019A482/47067/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a non-bailable warrant and criminal proceedings, the court refused the prayer to quash at this stage due to factual disputes but directed that bail would be considered if applicants surrender within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Non-bailable warrant kept in abeyance for 30 days; application refused to be quashed but directed to consider bail if applicants surrender within 30 days.

Farhan @ Ashoor and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 47067 of 2019 Applicant :- Farhan @ Ashoor And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mehdi Abbas Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶3

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

¶4

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned Non-Bailable Warrant dated 11.11.2019 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 1181 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 163 of 2018, under Sections- 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 325, 336, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Jarcha, District- Gautam Buddh Nagar, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate I, Gautam Buddh Nagar.

¶5

The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶6

Having heard the learned counsel for the applicants and perused the materials brought on record, it does not appear to be a fit case to quash the impugned order. The prayer to quash the same is hereby refused, at this stage as the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicants involves factual disputes and appraisal of evidence.

¶7

However, looking at the nature of offence alleged and attending facts and circumstances of the case, as have been brought on record, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.

¶8

For a period of 30 days from today, the non-bailable warrant issued against the applicants shall be kept in abeyance.

¶9

The present application stands disposed of .

¶10

Order Date :- 20.12.2019 Priya

Farhan @ Ashoor and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Farhan @ Ashoor 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

Hakeem Khan @ Nannhe Khan and 2 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Anshul Anand and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Mangal and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Smt. Sumitra @ Savitri and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Atendra Alias Atendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Humayu Khan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another