Dismissed

Lalit Kumar @ Lalto and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2020A482/14847/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by recasting the plea and directing the trial court to decide the bail application expeditiously within 45 days of filing, wherein no coercive action would be taken against the applicants during this period.

What did the court decide?

Directs trial court to decide bail application expeditiously if filed within 45 days; coercive action stayed till then.

Lalit Kumar @ Lalto and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2020) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14847 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Lalit Kumar @ Lalto And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

The applicants have sought for the following relief in the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.:-

¶7

"set-a-side the impugned order dated 24.8.2020 passed by Sessions Judge, Mathura in Criminal Reviion No. 158 of 2019 (C.I.S No. 160/2019) Lalit Kumar @ Lalto & Another Vs. State of U.P. & another, as well as order dated 2.3.2019 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.4, Mathura in case No. 6650 of 2017, Smt. Kavita Vs. Lalita Kumar & others, under Sections 354 I.P.c. Police Station Jamunapar, District Mathura, and entire criminal proceeding of Case No. 6650 of 2017, Smt. Kavita Vs. Lalit Kumar & others, under Sections 354 I.P.C. Police Station Jamunapar District Mathura, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, Mathura may also be quashed"

¶8

Learned A.G.A. submits that commission of offence is disclosed against the applicant from the material in the record. Learned trial court has accorded full consideration to the evidence in the record and has also found that a prima facie offence is made out against the applicants.

¶9

Faced with this, Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants does not press the relief sought in the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. He recasts his relief and submits that the applicants will appear before the learned trial court and apply for bail.

¶10

The only prayer made by Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants is that bail application of the applicants may be decided expeditiously.

¶11

In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, this application is disposed of with the following directions:

¶12

I. The applicants will appear before the learned trial court within a period of 45 days and apply for bail.

¶13

II. In case the bail application is filed within the aforesaid period, the learned trial court shall decide the bail application expeditiously in the light of law laid down by this Court in Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported at 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement entered by Hon'ble Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P . reported at 2009 ( 3) ADJ 322 (SC) .

¶14

III. For a period of 45 days no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

¶15

IV. In case the applicants do not apply for bail in the aforesaid period, this order shall stand automatically recalled without recourse to this Court. The learned trial court shall proceed thereafter in accordance with law.

¶16

Order Date :- 9.12.2020/Nadeem Ahmad

Lalit Kumar @ Lalto and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalit Kumar @ Lalto and Another 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

Harvir and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Akram and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandrabhan and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shishupal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kolwas Yadav @ Kalwas Vs State of U.P.

Mahfooz Alam Vs State of U.P. and Another