Dismissed

Mohammad Shahid Saifi v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC8 Oct 2020A482/12835/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed to quash an order disclosing the case diary and stay proceedings. The court found the petition misconceived because the applicant suppressed material facts regarding coercive measures and absence from court.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed with the expectation that if the applicant surrenders, his bail application shall be considered expeditiously.

Mohammad Shahid Saifi Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 34

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12835 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Mohammad Shahid Saifi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Khalid Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for applicant and Sri Jai Prakash Singh, Advocate, appearing for first-informant and learned A.G.A. appearing for State

¶6

Applicant, by means of the instant application, is seeking following relief:

¶7

“It is, therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the order dated 25.06.2019 by which the learned C.J.M. has directed to handover the photostat copy of the case diary in accordance with law to the investigating Officer.

¶8

It is therefore, further prayed that this Hon’’ble Court may also be pleased to stay the further proceedings of Case No. 593 of 2019 (Smt. Yasmeen Vs. Mohammad Shahid Saifi & another) arising out of Case Crime No. 925 of 2018 under Section 352, 326A, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kasganj, District Kasganj pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Kasganj and/or pass such other and further order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.”

¶9

During the course of arguments, learned counsel appearing for first-informant has produced the orders dated 27.05.2020 and 17.08.2020. It is noted therein that closure report came to be rejected by the Court on 27.05.2020. Subsequent order (dated 17.08.2020) reflects that applicant has not submitted to the Court and is not participating in the proceedings. Coercive measure under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been initiated. The instant application was filed in August’ 2020 but material facts noted in the aforesaid orders have not been disclosed, rather suppressed.

¶10

In view thereof, the petition, being misconceived, is dismissed.

¶11

In the event, applicant surrenders, it is expected that his bail application shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶12

Order Date :- 8.10.2020

¶13

P. Sri.

¶14

Digitally signed by Justice Suneet Kumar Date: 2020.10.08 16:16:00 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohammad Shahid Saifi v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Shahid Saifi v. State of U.P. and Anr.

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

N.K. Jalan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manoj Goyal Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and Another

Smt. Pooja Devi Vs State of U.P.

Chhote Lal Vs State of U.P.

Ram Ji Vs State of U.P.

Bipin Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Anr.